From john.mcadams@marquette.edu Sun Dec 21 14:02:04 2003
Newsgroups: alt.assassination.jfk
Subject: Aguilar's "Back of the Head" Witnesses - 6
From: john.mcadams@marquette.edu (John McAdams)
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 20:02:04 GMT


Gary Aguilar claims to have examined the testimony of 46 witnesses to
Kennedy's head wound, at both Parkland and Bethesda, and found that 44
of the 46 described the head wound as contradicting the photos and
x-rays of the autopsy as they exist in the National Archives.

So does Gary have 44 "back of the head" witnesses?  And are his 46
witnesses selected so as to avoid witnesses who placed the wound at
the top of the head, or the side of the head?

Let's take one example:

The following quotes from Aguilar are taken from:

http://www.assassinationweb.com/ag6.htm


<Quote on>-----------------------------

18) RICHARD A. LIPSEY - an aide to General Wehle who was Commanding
General of the military District of Washington, U. S. Army, he was
present at JFK's autopsy. In an interview with the HSCA's Andy Purdy
and Mark Flanagan on 1-18-78, he claimed that the autopsists "were
'absolutely, unequivocally' convinced that he (JFK) had been shot
three times...there were three separate wounds and three separate
bullets.". Lipsey gave a confusing account of JFK's head wound. He
"identified the entrance in the lower head as being just inside the
hairline", but claimed that there was "no real entrance in the rear of
the head...one bullet blasted away an entire portion (entrance and
exit)..." (sic). Purdy also reported that Lipsey felt that "one bullet
entered the back of the head and exited resulting in part of the face
and head being blown away" (HSCA, JFK Collection, RG 233) Lipsey
completed an autopsy face sheet diagram that depicted an area of the
right lateral skull missing, anterior and posterior to the ear, where
he had written "same area blown away as wound". In addition, there was
a wound low in the skull, presumably of entrance, that was the source
of the throat exit wound, which he labeled bullet #2. Finally there
was a wound on the back, labeled #3 but the bullet could not be found
in the body Lipsey claimed. 

<Quote off>-------------------------------------------

Aguilar's description of Lipsey's testimony is accurate enough, which
raises the question of why Aguilar considers Lipsey a "back of the
head" witness.

The most precise account of Lipsey's view of the wound is found in the
drawing that Lipsey did for the HSCA.  Bill Hamley has kindly put it
online:

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/images/lipsey.gif

In recounting some of the confused elements of Lipsey's testimony,
Aguilar seems to be trying to impeach him as a witness.  This may well
be fair enough, but if a witness said the large defect was on the
*side* of the head, and not the back, no amount of impeachment can
make him a "back of the head" witness.

So what we have is yet another "back of the head" witness from
Aguilar's tabulation who didn't say the large defect was in the back
of the head.  In fact, his drawing explicitly excludes the back.

.John

 
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm