[Ben Holmes]

(09-15-2016, 01:15 PM)Patrick C Wrote:  I disagree, the Parkland doctors put the wound further back than the autopsy report placed the wound.

You're LYING AGAIN, Patrick.

You'll ABSOLUTELY REFUSE to provide any evidence whatsoever that the Parietal-Occipital described by the Parkland doctors is different than the 'chiefly the parietal bone but extending somewhat into the temporal and occipital regions'...

The fact that you'll refuse to cite for any difference demonstrates that you KNOW that you're lying.
 

(09-15-2016, 01:15 PM)Patrick C Wrote:  Of course there is going to be some degree of laxity on behalf of the Parkland staff because they did not measure the wound at all and all they have is an impression from memory. It is perplexing that they almost all thought the wound was further back than it was, but it should not be surprising.

It has though given rise to a lot of pro conspiracy bunkum over the years which is rather a shame.

Baden is quite correct of course and give his profession and experience one should not be surprised. There is no doubt that a bullet entered the back of the head. Anyone who thinks differently needs their head looking at - no pun intended.

Baden's a liar, and so are you. Baden DIRECTLY conflicts with the location of the wound as given by the Autopsy Report - claiming that it was NOT in the Parietal-Occipital - "The head exit wound was not in the parietal-occipital area, as the Parkland doctors said."

So let's do this ...

Patrick - TELL US WHERE THE LARGE WOUND ON JFK'S HEAD WAS...

Use medical terminology, and be as accurate as you can.

If you DARE to use the terms Parietal or Occipital - you'll have proven yourself a liar.

My crystal ball is SCREAMING at me right now - telling me that you'll never have the courage nor honesty to answer the question...