Post by Rob Caprio on Jul 14, 2019 20:56:50 GMT -5
All portions are ©️ Robert Caprio 2006-2024
3.bp.blogspot.com/_I4lZU0BrRsg/TPXTI3y8v1I/AAAAAAAAAE4/Hot_KJ7VKdY/s1600/warren.jpg
upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f6/CE5301C.jpg
s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/s3.timetoast.com/public/uploads/photos/9195082/Dr._Charles_%E2%80%9CJim%E2%80%9D_Carrico.jpg
upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/dd/Lee_Harvey_Oswald_arrest_card_1963.jpg/800px-Lee_Harvey_Oswald_arrest_card_1963.jpg
It is time for more questions the Warren Commission (WC) defenders can’t/won’t refute with evidence.
******************************************
(1) Why was Jack Ruby told by a member of the Secret Service (SS) NOT to tell him certain things because he was going to trial when NO one cared enough to warn Lee Harvey Oswald (LHO) about this?
If we go to Jack Ruby’s WC testimony we will see this exchange.
[Note: The Mr. Moore mentioned here is Elmer Moore of the SS.]
Mr. RUBY. Where do you stand, Moore?
Mr. MOORE. Well, I am assigned to the Commission, Jack.
Mr. RUBY. The President assigned you?
Mr. MOORE. No; my chief did. And I am not involved in the investigation. I am more of a security officer.
Mr. RUBY. Boys, I am in a tough spot, I tell you that.
Mr. MOORE. You recall when I talked to you, there were certain things I asked you not to tell me at the time, for certain reasons, that you were probably going to trial at that time, and I respected your position on that and asked you not to tell me certain things.
Was LHO told NOT to say certain things because he was “probably going to trial?” I doubt it. Also, what were these “certain things” Moore did NOT want to hear? I don’t know because the WC did NOT bother to ask what these things may have related to. Why NOT?
Can anyone show that LHO was warned like this about what he said to the Dallas Police Department (DPD), FBI, SS or any other organization? Or tell us what these “certain things” may have been?
(2) Why did Dr. Charles Carrico’s comments about the wounds seen on President John F. Kennedy (JFK) NOT match the official conclusion?
In Commission Exhibit (CE) 392 we see a report summary of what was seen by the Parkland Hospital (PH) staff on November 22, 1963 when they tried to save JFK’s life. We see the following written regarding the wounds noticed on JFK’s body.
Quote on
www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/pages/WH_Vol17_0014b.jpg
Dr. Carrico noted the President to have slow, agonal respiratory efforts. He could hear a heartbeat but found no pulse or blood pressure to be present. Two external wounds, one in the lower third of the ANTERIOR neck, the other in the OCCIPITAL region of the skull, were noted. Through the head wound, blood and brain were extruding. Dr. Carrico inserted a cuffed endotracheal tube. While doing so, he noted a ragged wound of the trachea immediately below the larynx. (CE 392, p. 2) (Emphasis added)
www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0014b.htm
Quote off
This shows us that Dr. Charles Carrico saw a wound to the anterior side of JFK’s neck. If we search on the word “anterior” this is what we will find.
Quote on
Anterior and posterior[edit]
In human anatomical usage, anterior refers to the "front" of the individual, and is synonymous with ventral, other than in the head. Similarly, posterior, refers to the "back" of the subject, and is synonymous with dorsal, other than in the head (see Table 3).[Tortora, G.J. and Derrickson, B. Principles of Anatomy and Physiology. Wiley 2006 ISBN 0-471-68934-3]
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatomical_terms_of_location#cite_note-Tortora2006-3
Thus, anterior means the FRONT. He did NOT note a wound to the base of the neck in the POSTERIOR as the WC would claim later on. Keep in mind too, Dr. Carrico was the first doctor to view JFK so he had time to look at him the most.
Mr. SPECTER. Who was the first doctor to reach President Kennedy on his arrival at Parkland Hospital?
Dr. CARRICO. I was.
Furthermore, note that he saw a wound in the OCCIPITAL area of the skull, which means the REAR/POSTERIOR section. How could LHO allegedly shoot him from behind while causing a massive wound to the rear of the skull? It isn’t possible of course. This shows a shot came from the front of the limousine.
Finally, the claim has been made for years that the tracheotomy covered up the bullet wound in the neck, thus, it was NOT seen by the prosectors at Bethesda Naval Hospital when they performed the autopsy on JFK. However, this comment by Dr. Carrico could be read to understand that he saw the bullet wound and ONLY noted the “ragged wound of the trachea” while he was inserting an endotracheal tube. This would mean the ragged wound was separate from the clean hole he noted earlier. If you doubt this conclusion then simply read Dr. Carrico’s testimony (all of it as John McAdams’ website of testimony has the first part missing). He said this to Arlen Specter.
Mr. SPECTER. Dr. Carrico, with respect to this small wound in the anterior lower third of the neck which you have just described, could you be any more specific in defining the characteristics of that wound?
Dr. CARRICO. This was probably a 4-7 mm wound, almost in the midline, maybe a little to the right of the midline, and below the thyroid cartilage. It was, as I recall, RATHER ROUND and there were NO JAGGED EDGES or stellate lacerations.
Obviously Specter moved on after hearing this from Dr. Carrico. A “rather round” wound with NO jagged edges would mean it was an ENTRY wound, and NOT an exit wound as he and the WC would tell us. It also shows it was separate from the wound he saw when he put the endotracheal tube in JFK. Where did that jagged wound come from?
Handwritten copy of Dr. Carrico’s report: www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/pages/WH_Vol17_0015b.jpg
The small round hole would be corroborated by Dr. Malcolm Perry during his WC testimony.
Mr. SPECTER - Will you continue, then, Dr. Perry, as to what you observed of his condition?
Dr. PERRY - Yes, there was blood noted on the carriage and a large avulsive wound on the right posterior cranium.
I cannot state the size, I did not examine it at all. I just noted the presence of lacerated brain tissue. In the lower part of the neck below the Adams apple was a small, roughly circular wound of perhaps 5 mm. in diameter from which blood was exuding slowly. I did not see any other wounds.
Mr. SPECTER - Would you now describe as particularly as possible the neck wound you observed?
Dr. PERRY - This was situated in the lower anterior one-third of the neck, approximately 5 mm. in diameter.
It was exuding blood slowly which partially obscured it. Its edges were neither ragged nor were they punched out, but rather clean.
Mr. SPECTER - Have you now described the neck wound as specifically as you can?
Dr. PERRY - I have.
Despite him telling Specter he could NOT determine if it was a wound of entry or exit this is hard to believe given his own description of it. Entry wounds are clean and round, whereas exit wounds tend to be larger and ragged. Clearly, despite his hesitance to say, the wound he described was one of entry and again it was not the same one that the endotracheal tube was inserted into.
Can anyone explain how he saw wounds that do NOT match the official conclusion? And where this jagged wound had come from?
(3) Was Lee Harvey Oswald the illegitimate son of Jack Ruby?
If we go to CE 2249 we will the following letter written by Lieutenant Jack Revill to the DPD Chief Jesse Curry.
Quote on
www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/pages/WC_Vol25_0098b.gif
Re: George Butler,
Lieutenant of Police
Sir:
On December 9, 1963, the undersigned officers were approached by Lieutenant Butler and he related that he had information that Lee Harvey Oswald was the illegitimate son of Jack Ruby.
Lieutenant Butler further stated that he had information that Jack Ruby had applied for a visa to Mexico about the same time that Lee Harvey Oswald had visited that country. He suggested that we contact the Mexican Counsul to confirm this information.
Respectfully submitted,
Jack Revill, Lieutenant
Special Services Bureau
(CE 2249, p. 41)
www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0098b.htm
Quote off
Wow! Now that is a doozy, huh? What did the WC do with this? NOTHING of course as Lieutenant Butler was never called or interviewed by the WC to find out if this information was true. Lt. Butler is a person who has a very interesting background too. Butler had an “extreme knowledge of organized” crime according to reporter Seth Kantor so this could account for how he knew this about Jack Ruby. Kantor also pointed out that Butler had been loaned to the U.S. Senate "…by the Dallas police department to aid three different U.S. Senate investigatory groups as an expert on gangster operations".
Lt. Butler was put in charge of the transfer of LHO as well by Captain Will Fritz. Despite losing his prisoner and his long relationship with Jack Ruby the WC did not see fit to call him. Why NOT?
Also, we just saw this in a recent post in our series as Fort Worth Star Telegram reporter Thayer Waldo said this about Butler shortly before the transfer of LHO had taken place.
Mr. HUBERT. Did you find that other officials were not so cooperative?
Mr. WALDO. I would say, yes, …What I wanted to say about Lieutenant Butler was that this almost stolid poise, or perhaps phlegmatic poise is a better word, that I had noticed all through even the most hectic times of the 22d and the 23d, appeared to have deserted him completely on the morning of the 24th. He was an extremely nervous man, so nervous that when I was standing asking him a question after I had entered the ramp and gotten down to the basement area, just moments before Oswald was brought down, he was standing profile to me and I noticed his lips trembling as he listened and waited for my answer. It was simply a physical characteristic. I had by then spent enough hours talking to this man so that it struck me as something totally out of character. Now, he may merely have had a bad night.
Or perhaps he knew what was coming in a little while? I would doubt LHO was the illegitimate son of Jack Ruby, but you never know for sure in this case about anything. It would have been nice for the WC to find out for sure for us, but I guess that would be asking too much of them.
The other claim Butler made is equally intriguing and again nothing was done to find out if it was true or not. He said Ruby had applied for a visa to Mexico around the same time LHO went there. Of course LHO never really went, but that is not the point here. Did Ruby get a Mexican visa? Did he go? These are interesting and intriguing questions the WC (and FBI) seemed to have NO interest in. Why?
Can anyone answer these questions for me and provide information the WC did not?
3.bp.blogspot.com/_I4lZU0BrRsg/TPXTI3y8v1I/AAAAAAAAAE4/Hot_KJ7VKdY/s1600/warren.jpg
upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f6/CE5301C.jpg
s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/s3.timetoast.com/public/uploads/photos/9195082/Dr._Charles_%E2%80%9CJim%E2%80%9D_Carrico.jpg
upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/dd/Lee_Harvey_Oswald_arrest_card_1963.jpg/800px-Lee_Harvey_Oswald_arrest_card_1963.jpg
It is time for more questions the Warren Commission (WC) defenders can’t/won’t refute with evidence.
******************************************
(1) Why was Jack Ruby told by a member of the Secret Service (SS) NOT to tell him certain things because he was going to trial when NO one cared enough to warn Lee Harvey Oswald (LHO) about this?
If we go to Jack Ruby’s WC testimony we will see this exchange.
[Note: The Mr. Moore mentioned here is Elmer Moore of the SS.]
Mr. RUBY. Where do you stand, Moore?
Mr. MOORE. Well, I am assigned to the Commission, Jack.
Mr. RUBY. The President assigned you?
Mr. MOORE. No; my chief did. And I am not involved in the investigation. I am more of a security officer.
Mr. RUBY. Boys, I am in a tough spot, I tell you that.
Mr. MOORE. You recall when I talked to you, there were certain things I asked you not to tell me at the time, for certain reasons, that you were probably going to trial at that time, and I respected your position on that and asked you not to tell me certain things.
Was LHO told NOT to say certain things because he was “probably going to trial?” I doubt it. Also, what were these “certain things” Moore did NOT want to hear? I don’t know because the WC did NOT bother to ask what these things may have related to. Why NOT?
Can anyone show that LHO was warned like this about what he said to the Dallas Police Department (DPD), FBI, SS or any other organization? Or tell us what these “certain things” may have been?
(2) Why did Dr. Charles Carrico’s comments about the wounds seen on President John F. Kennedy (JFK) NOT match the official conclusion?
In Commission Exhibit (CE) 392 we see a report summary of what was seen by the Parkland Hospital (PH) staff on November 22, 1963 when they tried to save JFK’s life. We see the following written regarding the wounds noticed on JFK’s body.
Quote on
www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/pages/WH_Vol17_0014b.jpg
Dr. Carrico noted the President to have slow, agonal respiratory efforts. He could hear a heartbeat but found no pulse or blood pressure to be present. Two external wounds, one in the lower third of the ANTERIOR neck, the other in the OCCIPITAL region of the skull, were noted. Through the head wound, blood and brain were extruding. Dr. Carrico inserted a cuffed endotracheal tube. While doing so, he noted a ragged wound of the trachea immediately below the larynx. (CE 392, p. 2) (Emphasis added)
www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0014b.htm
Quote off
This shows us that Dr. Charles Carrico saw a wound to the anterior side of JFK’s neck. If we search on the word “anterior” this is what we will find.
Quote on
Anterior and posterior[edit]
In human anatomical usage, anterior refers to the "front" of the individual, and is synonymous with ventral, other than in the head. Similarly, posterior, refers to the "back" of the subject, and is synonymous with dorsal, other than in the head (see Table 3).[Tortora, G.J. and Derrickson, B. Principles of Anatomy and Physiology. Wiley 2006 ISBN 0-471-68934-3]
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatomical_terms_of_location#cite_note-Tortora2006-3
Thus, anterior means the FRONT. He did NOT note a wound to the base of the neck in the POSTERIOR as the WC would claim later on. Keep in mind too, Dr. Carrico was the first doctor to view JFK so he had time to look at him the most.
Mr. SPECTER. Who was the first doctor to reach President Kennedy on his arrival at Parkland Hospital?
Dr. CARRICO. I was.
Furthermore, note that he saw a wound in the OCCIPITAL area of the skull, which means the REAR/POSTERIOR section. How could LHO allegedly shoot him from behind while causing a massive wound to the rear of the skull? It isn’t possible of course. This shows a shot came from the front of the limousine.
Finally, the claim has been made for years that the tracheotomy covered up the bullet wound in the neck, thus, it was NOT seen by the prosectors at Bethesda Naval Hospital when they performed the autopsy on JFK. However, this comment by Dr. Carrico could be read to understand that he saw the bullet wound and ONLY noted the “ragged wound of the trachea” while he was inserting an endotracheal tube. This would mean the ragged wound was separate from the clean hole he noted earlier. If you doubt this conclusion then simply read Dr. Carrico’s testimony (all of it as John McAdams’ website of testimony has the first part missing). He said this to Arlen Specter.
Mr. SPECTER. Dr. Carrico, with respect to this small wound in the anterior lower third of the neck which you have just described, could you be any more specific in defining the characteristics of that wound?
Dr. CARRICO. This was probably a 4-7 mm wound, almost in the midline, maybe a little to the right of the midline, and below the thyroid cartilage. It was, as I recall, RATHER ROUND and there were NO JAGGED EDGES or stellate lacerations.
Obviously Specter moved on after hearing this from Dr. Carrico. A “rather round” wound with NO jagged edges would mean it was an ENTRY wound, and NOT an exit wound as he and the WC would tell us. It also shows it was separate from the wound he saw when he put the endotracheal tube in JFK. Where did that jagged wound come from?
Handwritten copy of Dr. Carrico’s report: www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/pages/WH_Vol17_0015b.jpg
The small round hole would be corroborated by Dr. Malcolm Perry during his WC testimony.
Mr. SPECTER - Will you continue, then, Dr. Perry, as to what you observed of his condition?
Dr. PERRY - Yes, there was blood noted on the carriage and a large avulsive wound on the right posterior cranium.
I cannot state the size, I did not examine it at all. I just noted the presence of lacerated brain tissue. In the lower part of the neck below the Adams apple was a small, roughly circular wound of perhaps 5 mm. in diameter from which blood was exuding slowly. I did not see any other wounds.
Mr. SPECTER - Would you now describe as particularly as possible the neck wound you observed?
Dr. PERRY - This was situated in the lower anterior one-third of the neck, approximately 5 mm. in diameter.
It was exuding blood slowly which partially obscured it. Its edges were neither ragged nor were they punched out, but rather clean.
Mr. SPECTER - Have you now described the neck wound as specifically as you can?
Dr. PERRY - I have.
Despite him telling Specter he could NOT determine if it was a wound of entry or exit this is hard to believe given his own description of it. Entry wounds are clean and round, whereas exit wounds tend to be larger and ragged. Clearly, despite his hesitance to say, the wound he described was one of entry and again it was not the same one that the endotracheal tube was inserted into.
Can anyone explain how he saw wounds that do NOT match the official conclusion? And where this jagged wound had come from?
(3) Was Lee Harvey Oswald the illegitimate son of Jack Ruby?
If we go to CE 2249 we will the following letter written by Lieutenant Jack Revill to the DPD Chief Jesse Curry.
Quote on
www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/pages/WC_Vol25_0098b.gif
Re: George Butler,
Lieutenant of Police
Sir:
On December 9, 1963, the undersigned officers were approached by Lieutenant Butler and he related that he had information that Lee Harvey Oswald was the illegitimate son of Jack Ruby.
Lieutenant Butler further stated that he had information that Jack Ruby had applied for a visa to Mexico about the same time that Lee Harvey Oswald had visited that country. He suggested that we contact the Mexican Counsul to confirm this information.
Respectfully submitted,
Jack Revill, Lieutenant
Special Services Bureau
(CE 2249, p. 41)
www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0098b.htm
Quote off
Wow! Now that is a doozy, huh? What did the WC do with this? NOTHING of course as Lieutenant Butler was never called or interviewed by the WC to find out if this information was true. Lt. Butler is a person who has a very interesting background too. Butler had an “extreme knowledge of organized” crime according to reporter Seth Kantor so this could account for how he knew this about Jack Ruby. Kantor also pointed out that Butler had been loaned to the U.S. Senate "…by the Dallas police department to aid three different U.S. Senate investigatory groups as an expert on gangster operations".
Lt. Butler was put in charge of the transfer of LHO as well by Captain Will Fritz. Despite losing his prisoner and his long relationship with Jack Ruby the WC did not see fit to call him. Why NOT?
Also, we just saw this in a recent post in our series as Fort Worth Star Telegram reporter Thayer Waldo said this about Butler shortly before the transfer of LHO had taken place.
Mr. HUBERT. Did you find that other officials were not so cooperative?
Mr. WALDO. I would say, yes, …What I wanted to say about Lieutenant Butler was that this almost stolid poise, or perhaps phlegmatic poise is a better word, that I had noticed all through even the most hectic times of the 22d and the 23d, appeared to have deserted him completely on the morning of the 24th. He was an extremely nervous man, so nervous that when I was standing asking him a question after I had entered the ramp and gotten down to the basement area, just moments before Oswald was brought down, he was standing profile to me and I noticed his lips trembling as he listened and waited for my answer. It was simply a physical characteristic. I had by then spent enough hours talking to this man so that it struck me as something totally out of character. Now, he may merely have had a bad night.
Or perhaps he knew what was coming in a little while? I would doubt LHO was the illegitimate son of Jack Ruby, but you never know for sure in this case about anything. It would have been nice for the WC to find out for sure for us, but I guess that would be asking too much of them.
The other claim Butler made is equally intriguing and again nothing was done to find out if it was true or not. He said Ruby had applied for a visa to Mexico around the same time LHO went there. Of course LHO never really went, but that is not the point here. Did Ruby get a Mexican visa? Did he go? These are interesting and intriguing questions the WC (and FBI) seemed to have NO interest in. Why?
Can anyone answer these questions for me and provide information the WC did not?