Post by Rob Caprio on Oct 28, 2018 17:27:30 GMT -5
All portions are ©️ Robert Caprio 2006-2024
d3t3ozftmdmh3i.cloudfront.net/production/podcast_uploaded_episode/492728/492728-1591224073206-833e3acd1717c.jpg
Researcher Wallace Milam did a series on Gerald Posner’s book “Case Closed” years ago and called it “Posner’s Follies.” I will post these in a number of threads in this series like I did Mark Lane’s rebuttal to Henry Wade’s claims.
Posner is so similar to the Warren Commission (WC) that the title of the series still applies.
***********************************************
Awhile back researcher Wallace Milam did a whole series on the Posner distortion of history, "Case Closed", and the relationship between these two men (Guy Banister & LHO) was the focus of one article. I love how he opens the article:
Quote on
All assassination researchers are familiar with Guy Banister, the right-wing New Orleans private detective and anti-Castro zealot who operated out of 544 Camp Street and rubbed shoulders with a variety of Marcello associates, anti-Castro exiles, and CIA operatives. **All except Gerald Posner, that is.**
Quote off
Milam says in the efforts to avoid any conspiratorial relationship, Posner chose "to ignore glaring evidence that Oswald and Banister were associated." Milam says this was a classic example of "managed evidence" which appears throughout Posner's book.
Perhaps Posner overlooked this info, or missed it, but Milam doesn't think so as "Posner chose to ignore evidence found on the very pages of sources he had used for quite another purpose, revealing once again his bias and his agenda."
Quote on
On page 141, Posner wrote: "There is simply no credible evidence that Oswald ever had an office at 544 Camp Street, or, much less, that he knew Guy Banister."
But later, on pages 168-169, Posner has to deal with the sticky issue of William George Gaudet, the man who obtained his Mexico tourist card just before Oswald did. Posner acknowledges that Gaudet was a source for the CIA's domestic contact division until 1961, but that states that he had no relationship with Oswald and that the "House Select committee reviewed Gaudet's CIA file and determined he had no clandestine relationship with the Agency.” As a source for this assertion, Posner cites HSCA Report, p. 219.
When one turns to page 219 of the HSCA Report, one finds this assertion, well enough, but one also finds something else, something which should have jumped out at Mr. Posner:
**Gaudet noted that on one occasion he observed Oswald speaking to Guy Banister on a street corner.**
As we have seen, Posner clearly read this page, since he cited it as a source, yet Posner still wrote, "There is no credible evidence that Oswald ever had an office at 544 Camp Street, or, much less, that he knew Guy Banister."
Quote off
As if this were not bad enough, there is further ignoring of his own sources: "He [Gaudet] was able to testify that during the trip [to Mexico] he did not encounter Oswald whom he had observed on occasion at the New Orleans Trade Mart." Gaudet also added that he had seen Oswald distributing literature near his New Orleans office.
Quote on
Had Posner, in the course of re-reading and re-indexing the Warren Commission Hearings and Exhibits, the HSCA Hearings, the Sears Catalogue and God knows what else, taken the time, he might have viewed a Canadian TV documentary from the 1970's, part of a series called "The Fifth Estate," in which researcher Peter Dale Scott conducted an interview with Gaudet at his home in Waveland, Mississippi [Gaudet has died since.]. Gaudet told Scott that he did indeed observe Oswald though he never spoke to him, that he did not think Oswald capable of the assassination, that he thought Oswald was being manipulated by anti-Castro Cubans and others, and that Oswald had gotten in over his head and was a fall guy.
Quote off
Wallace Milam continues his review of the claims made by Gerald Posner regarding the Parkland doctors and what they saw in regards to head wounds of JFK.
Dr. Charles Carrico
Quote on
A. The issue of observation and examination
Carrico told Posner: "We never had an opportunity to review his wounds in order to describe them accurately. We were trying to save his life." (p. 309)
BUT THE RECORD IS QUITE DIFFERENT:
In his appearance before the Warren Commission, Carrico told of examining the President's back and "then proceeded to the examination of his head. The large skull and scalp wound had been previously observed and was inspected a little more closely." (6 H 3)
Further evidence that Carrico observed the head wound in some detail is indicated by the fact that he assigned a specific size to the defect--"4-5 cm" when he first testified on March 25 (6 H 3), then "5 to 7 cm. in size" later in that same testimony. When he appeared again on March 30, he gave the dimensions of the wound as "5- by 71-cm [sic]" (3 H 361). [Clearly Carrico meant 5 x 7 centimeters in this latter statement.]
In his appearance before the HSCA investigators in 1977, Carrico stated the wound was "five by seven centimeters, something like that, 2 by 3 inches..." (HSCA, VII, p. 278)
B. The issue of the damaged cerebellum
Carrico admitted to Posner: "We did say we saw shattered brain, cerebellum, in the cortex area, and I think we were mistaken." (p. 311)
Carrico apparently did not see the body again after his initial observations, so it would appear that any decision of his that he erred would be based on either what his Parkland colleagues or some other person familiar with the medical evidence may have told him or upon examination of autopsy photographs.
CARRICO ON THE RECORD:
In his report written after examining the President, Carrico wrote of an "attempt to control oozing from cerebral and cerebellar tissue." (CE 392, Warren Report, p. 520)
When he testified before the Warren Commission, Carrico spoke of seeing "the skull was fragmented and bleeding cerebral and cerebellar tissue." (6 H 3).
As late as 1977, when he was interviewed by investigators by the HSCA, Carrico was still speaking of the cerebellar damage: "One could see blood and brains, both cerebellum and cerebrum fragments in that wound." (HSCA, VII, p. 268)
C. The issue of the location of the head wound
Dr. Carrico freely admitted to Posner that he had placed the large wound in the back of Kennedy's head. "We did say there was a parietal-occipital wound ... and I think we were mistaken ... We saw a large wound on the right side of the head. I don't believe we saw any occipital bone. It was not there. It was parietal bone. And if we said otherwise, we were mistaken.
Again, we must wonder how it is that Carrico can now be just as certain that damaged occipital bone "was not there" as he was that it WAS THERE on the afternoon of the assassination. It is easy to see the source of his original opinion: the body lay on a table before him. One must question the basis for this latest certainty, acquired 30 years after the event.
CARRICO ON THE RECORD:
When he testified before the Warren Commission, Carrico described "Quite a large gaping wound, located in the right occipitoparietal region. I would estimate to be about 5 to 7 cm. in size, more or less circular, with avulsions of the calvarium and scalp tissue." (6 H 6)
Two other Parkland Doctors, though Posner apparently did not interview them either, examined the rear head wound carefully. A study of the sworn testimony of Dr. Kemp Clark, a neurosurgeon, and Dr. Robert McClelland, who was at the head of the emergency room cart, reveals just how well the wound was observed at Parkland hospital.
Quote off
Like the WC’s claims, which most of Posner’s are, Posner’s claims are sunk by the evidence on record too!
d3t3ozftmdmh3i.cloudfront.net/production/podcast_uploaded_episode/492728/492728-1591224073206-833e3acd1717c.jpg
Researcher Wallace Milam did a series on Gerald Posner’s book “Case Closed” years ago and called it “Posner’s Follies.” I will post these in a number of threads in this series like I did Mark Lane’s rebuttal to Henry Wade’s claims.
Posner is so similar to the Warren Commission (WC) that the title of the series still applies.
***********************************************
Awhile back researcher Wallace Milam did a whole series on the Posner distortion of history, "Case Closed", and the relationship between these two men (Guy Banister & LHO) was the focus of one article. I love how he opens the article:
Quote on
All assassination researchers are familiar with Guy Banister, the right-wing New Orleans private detective and anti-Castro zealot who operated out of 544 Camp Street and rubbed shoulders with a variety of Marcello associates, anti-Castro exiles, and CIA operatives. **All except Gerald Posner, that is.**
Quote off
Milam says in the efforts to avoid any conspiratorial relationship, Posner chose "to ignore glaring evidence that Oswald and Banister were associated." Milam says this was a classic example of "managed evidence" which appears throughout Posner's book.
Perhaps Posner overlooked this info, or missed it, but Milam doesn't think so as "Posner chose to ignore evidence found on the very pages of sources he had used for quite another purpose, revealing once again his bias and his agenda."
Quote on
On page 141, Posner wrote: "There is simply no credible evidence that Oswald ever had an office at 544 Camp Street, or, much less, that he knew Guy Banister."
But later, on pages 168-169, Posner has to deal with the sticky issue of William George Gaudet, the man who obtained his Mexico tourist card just before Oswald did. Posner acknowledges that Gaudet was a source for the CIA's domestic contact division until 1961, but that states that he had no relationship with Oswald and that the "House Select committee reviewed Gaudet's CIA file and determined he had no clandestine relationship with the Agency.” As a source for this assertion, Posner cites HSCA Report, p. 219.
When one turns to page 219 of the HSCA Report, one finds this assertion, well enough, but one also finds something else, something which should have jumped out at Mr. Posner:
**Gaudet noted that on one occasion he observed Oswald speaking to Guy Banister on a street corner.**
As we have seen, Posner clearly read this page, since he cited it as a source, yet Posner still wrote, "There is no credible evidence that Oswald ever had an office at 544 Camp Street, or, much less, that he knew Guy Banister."
Quote off
As if this were not bad enough, there is further ignoring of his own sources: "He [Gaudet] was able to testify that during the trip [to Mexico] he did not encounter Oswald whom he had observed on occasion at the New Orleans Trade Mart." Gaudet also added that he had seen Oswald distributing literature near his New Orleans office.
Quote on
Had Posner, in the course of re-reading and re-indexing the Warren Commission Hearings and Exhibits, the HSCA Hearings, the Sears Catalogue and God knows what else, taken the time, he might have viewed a Canadian TV documentary from the 1970's, part of a series called "The Fifth Estate," in which researcher Peter Dale Scott conducted an interview with Gaudet at his home in Waveland, Mississippi [Gaudet has died since.]. Gaudet told Scott that he did indeed observe Oswald though he never spoke to him, that he did not think Oswald capable of the assassination, that he thought Oswald was being manipulated by anti-Castro Cubans and others, and that Oswald had gotten in over his head and was a fall guy.
Quote off
Wallace Milam continues his review of the claims made by Gerald Posner regarding the Parkland doctors and what they saw in regards to head wounds of JFK.
Dr. Charles Carrico
Quote on
A. The issue of observation and examination
Carrico told Posner: "We never had an opportunity to review his wounds in order to describe them accurately. We were trying to save his life." (p. 309)
BUT THE RECORD IS QUITE DIFFERENT:
In his appearance before the Warren Commission, Carrico told of examining the President's back and "then proceeded to the examination of his head. The large skull and scalp wound had been previously observed and was inspected a little more closely." (6 H 3)
Further evidence that Carrico observed the head wound in some detail is indicated by the fact that he assigned a specific size to the defect--"4-5 cm" when he first testified on March 25 (6 H 3), then "5 to 7 cm. in size" later in that same testimony. When he appeared again on March 30, he gave the dimensions of the wound as "5- by 71-cm [sic]" (3 H 361). [Clearly Carrico meant 5 x 7 centimeters in this latter statement.]
In his appearance before the HSCA investigators in 1977, Carrico stated the wound was "five by seven centimeters, something like that, 2 by 3 inches..." (HSCA, VII, p. 278)
B. The issue of the damaged cerebellum
Carrico admitted to Posner: "We did say we saw shattered brain, cerebellum, in the cortex area, and I think we were mistaken." (p. 311)
Carrico apparently did not see the body again after his initial observations, so it would appear that any decision of his that he erred would be based on either what his Parkland colleagues or some other person familiar with the medical evidence may have told him or upon examination of autopsy photographs.
CARRICO ON THE RECORD:
In his report written after examining the President, Carrico wrote of an "attempt to control oozing from cerebral and cerebellar tissue." (CE 392, Warren Report, p. 520)
When he testified before the Warren Commission, Carrico spoke of seeing "the skull was fragmented and bleeding cerebral and cerebellar tissue." (6 H 3).
As late as 1977, when he was interviewed by investigators by the HSCA, Carrico was still speaking of the cerebellar damage: "One could see blood and brains, both cerebellum and cerebrum fragments in that wound." (HSCA, VII, p. 268)
C. The issue of the location of the head wound
Dr. Carrico freely admitted to Posner that he had placed the large wound in the back of Kennedy's head. "We did say there was a parietal-occipital wound ... and I think we were mistaken ... We saw a large wound on the right side of the head. I don't believe we saw any occipital bone. It was not there. It was parietal bone. And if we said otherwise, we were mistaken.
Again, we must wonder how it is that Carrico can now be just as certain that damaged occipital bone "was not there" as he was that it WAS THERE on the afternoon of the assassination. It is easy to see the source of his original opinion: the body lay on a table before him. One must question the basis for this latest certainty, acquired 30 years after the event.
CARRICO ON THE RECORD:
When he testified before the Warren Commission, Carrico described "Quite a large gaping wound, located in the right occipitoparietal region. I would estimate to be about 5 to 7 cm. in size, more or less circular, with avulsions of the calvarium and scalp tissue." (6 H 6)
Two other Parkland Doctors, though Posner apparently did not interview them either, examined the rear head wound carefully. A study of the sworn testimony of Dr. Kemp Clark, a neurosurgeon, and Dr. Robert McClelland, who was at the head of the emergency room cart, reveals just how well the wound was observed at Parkland hospital.
Quote off
Like the WC’s claims, which most of Posner’s are, Posner’s claims are sunk by the evidence on record too!