[Ben Holmes]

Quote:"We would usually see about, as I recall, about a thousand gunshot wounds and a thousand stab wounds a year and about five thousand automobile accident victims a year in the emergency room. The emergency room at Parkland was very busy. Well over 100,000 to 125,000 visits a year at that time. All of us had seen well over 100 or 200 gunshot wounds by the time we had completed a residency, and so that was not something that was new to us or was particularly disturbing to us." - Ron Jones, M.D. - Oral History, Sixth Floor Museum

Believers simply cannot get around the FACT that the wound in JFK's throat was described as an entry wound.

Quite likely the same bullet that put a hole in the windshield that so many witnesses remarked on...

[Patrick C]

Ben Holmes Wrote:Believers simply cannot get around the FACT that the wound in JFK's throat was described as an entry wound.

BS. I have ZERO issue with some of the doctors stating the wound looked like an entry - including Perry. It was small and punctuate. However some exit wounds can resemble entry wounds and are not always larger and stellate as you should know!

Ben Holmes Wrote:All of us had seen well over 100 or 200 gunshot wounds by the time we had completed a residency, and so that was not something that was new to us or was particularly disturbing to us.

Yes and how many of those gun shot wounds were caused by rifles........according to Robert Grossman....not many!

Do your home work Holmes and stop quoting misleading - ie incomplete data.

[Ben Holmes]

(08-31-2016, 11:37 AM)Patrick C Wrote:  

Ben Holmes Wrote:Believers simply cannot get around the FACT that the wound in JFK's throat was described as an entry wound.

BS. I have ZERO issue with some of the doctors stating the wound looked like an entry - including Perry. It was small and punctuate. However some exit wounds can resemble entry wounds and are not always larger and stellate as you should know!

Oh, perhaps you claim that now... but take, as merely one example:

(08-31-2016, 11:37 AM)Patrick C Wrote:  Oh Boy! Holmes what a howler - how your mind works is a mystery and a half...

"As Dr. Perry stated on 11/22/63 that the throat wound was an entry - we have a conspiracy."

So we have a conspiracy because a doctor states his opinion that the anterior wound was an entry...oh really, what about the possibility he was wrong.....

Go buy a book on logical debating for God's sake Holmes, its about time!

Or perhaps we should look at Henry Sienzant:

Henry Sienzant Wrote:

Ben Holmes Wrote:But we know today that Perry stated on three separate occasions during that news conference that this was an entry wound in the throat.

If emergency room doctors assessments are all that is necessary, isn't conducting an autopsy a waste of time?

(Henry knows, as do you, that the entry wound in JFK's throat was never even seen at the autopsy.)

Here's one of the Amazon trolls pontificating on the entry wound:

Quote:Who are we to believe.....an erroneous statement , on a very confusing day, where rumors are running wild.......or maybe Forensic Pathologists?

By the way, all but one of the parkland doctors agreed with the findings. OUCH!

Given some time, I can pull dozens more... so it's not "BS"... is it Patrick?

Indeed, the Warren Commission pretended to be unable to find the footage of the Parkland Press Conference... yet it was easily found later...  can you explain this curious fact?

 

(08-31-2016, 11:37 AM)Patrick C Wrote:   

Ben Holmes Wrote:All of us had seen well over 100 or 200 gunshot wounds by the time we had completed a residency, and so that was not something that was new to us or was particularly disturbing to us.

Yes and how many of those gun shot wounds were caused by rifles........according to Robert Grossman....not many!

Do your home work Holmes and stop quoting misleading - ie incomplete data.

What is "misleading" about stating "Believers simply cannot get around the FACT that the wound in JFK's throat was described as an entry wound?" It's true, as I've quoted examples above... 

Robert Grossman wasn't at the autopsy, and since he's been proven to be a liar on that topic, why would you believe him on anything else?

You pretend that autopsies can routinely tell the difference between a rifle wound and a pistol wound, but I'll make the flat statement that this is impossible.

You'll NEVER cite for this mythical difference.