#38
Conspiracy JFK Forum
Throat Wound
Re: Throat Wound
Garry,
I stated that I WAS aware of those notes when I saw them here, I had long forgotten about them, but as I explained my opinion is that he is describing damage to the skin on the forehead, which understandably considered by some to be the face. What I was disputing was that a frontal shot had caused additional damage to the face.
If you want to try and catch me out all the time, fine if you get some satisfaction from that....I have forgotten a lot about the JFK case and there will be some material I have never come across.
If I changed wounds to wound that was my mistake, I was not deliberately trying make one cut disappear.
I do not accept there was damage to the face - as in a shrapnel wound. I think there is an inaccurate memory situation here and possibly a semantic issue over face and forehead.
Perhaps your approach to this discussion is different to mine.......I do not view this forum as akin to being in a court of law. It is an amateur discussion on a 52 year old murder.
I for one do not have the time to research every point made and cite. Perhaps you do.....
Incidentally as I recall (but I am not going to dig out), but there were comments from others attending the autopsy that JFK's face showed no damage, other than the eyes being slightly bulbous.....
I stated that I WAS aware of those notes when I saw them here, I had long forgotten about them, but as I explained my opinion is that he is describing damage to the skin on the forehead, which understandably considered by some to be the face. What I was disputing was that a frontal shot had caused additional damage to the face.
If you want to try and catch me out all the time, fine if you get some satisfaction from that....I have forgotten a lot about the JFK case and there will be some material I have never come across.
If I changed wounds to wound that was my mistake, I was not deliberately trying make one cut disappear.
I do not accept there was damage to the face - as in a shrapnel wound. I think there is an inaccurate memory situation here and possibly a semantic issue over face and forehead.
Perhaps your approach to this discussion is different to mine.......I do not view this forum as akin to being in a court of law. It is an amateur discussion on a 52 year old murder.
I for one do not have the time to research every point made and cite. Perhaps you do.....
Incidentally as I recall (but I am not going to dig out), but there were comments from others attending the autopsy that JFK's face showed no damage, other than the eyes being slightly bulbous.....
| Messages In This Thread |
Users browsing this thread: 3 Guest(s)