Forums

Henry Sienzant Wrote:

Quote:"I clearly heard Dr. Finck ... complain that he had been unable to locate the handwritten notes that he had taken during the autopsy .... Dr. Finck concluded his story by angrily stating that he had to reconstruct his notes from memory shortly after the autopsy." - Affidavit of Leonard D. Saslaw, Ph.D. In 1996, Dr. Saslaw signed an affidavit recounting that JFK autopsy pathologist Dr. Pierre Finck had "with considerable irritation" told of his post-washup search for the notes he had taken during the autopsy.

The missing Finck notes join the litany of missing materials from the JFK autopsy...

Wait a second, please.

You're offering a 33-year-later hearsay account by somebody not in the autopsy room as *evidence*?

That makes no sense.

When did Finck say he lost his notes and couldn't find them?
Did he ever make that claim?

If he didn't, then you've got your answer to the question as to whether this hearsay account is credible or not, don't you?

Can you explain why this doctor waited three decades plus to come forward?
Can you support his recollection with any contemporary documentation?

If you can't explain and support, well, there's no good reason to believe this hearsay recollection, is there?

That Henry has a hard time believing that someone walked off with the autopsy notes is quite amusing. He knows quite well the intense way that the Secret Service controlled, for example, the X-rays & Photos.

Then thinks that they'd ignore the personal notes taken during the autopsy...

HOW SILLY!!!

Of course, the easy way to demonstrate that Finck's notes weren't taken is to simply produce them.

Henry complains that this is a "33-year old memory" - yet believers have no such compunctions when it comes to material that supports their view. Nor can Henry explain why the Warren Commission was completely ignorant of the fact that someone walked off with autopsy notes.

Memory.......

Ask yourself could you remember who was in a meeting you attended on an important work issue 5 years ago.....

Details....forget it.

Three shots, two shots yes.....

Patrick C Wrote:Memory.......

Ask yourself could you remember who was in a meeting you attended on an important work issue 5 years ago.....

Details....forget it.

Three shots, two shots yes.....

Tell us Patrick, do YOU believe that Dr. Finck wrote no notes during the autopsy?

I would expect that he DID Holmes yes......

Whether he actually did or not is another matter of course....who cares really the photos show an entry wound in the back of the head......case closed......

Patrick C Wrote:

Ben Holmes Wrote:Tell us Patrick, do YOU believe that Dr. Finck wrote no notes during the autopsy?

I would expect that he DID Holmes yes......

Whether he actually did or not is another matter of course....

Yet, even though you admit that he probably did write notes, you quite desperately try to argue against what must have been a pretty memorable event...

This simply goes to show how desperate you're getting ... fighting tooth & nail against anything you think illustrates a conspiracy.

I'm sure you'll admit that the Secret Service quite tightly controlled the Autopsy photos & X-rays - it's simply not that hard to understand that they'd want control over any notes as well.

Patrick C Wrote:who cares really the photos show an entry wound in the back of the head......case closed......

Of course, since the photos have no chain of custody, they're just about worthless. The HSCA couldn't even match the photos to the camera supplied by Bethesda... and since the photos CONTRADICT the Autopsy Report - you should be able to admit that you don't believe the Autopsy Report.

Yet you can't...

How embarrassing that must be!

Well except that the photo's show JFK and a hole in the back of his head and gaping wound above the ear.......and they are not fakes....so.....go figure.....

Remind me, how does the autopsy report contradict the photos - are you talking about the location of the entry wound....?

Patrick C Wrote:Well except that the photo's show JFK and a hole in the back of his head and gaping wound above the ear.......and they are not fakes....so.....go figure.....

Of course, since the photos have no chain of custody, they're just about worthless. The HSCA couldn't even match the photos to the camera supplied by Bethesda... they contradict virtually all of the eyewitnesses, and the Autopsy Report.

Patrick C Wrote:Remind me, how does the autopsy report contradict the photos - are you talking about the location of the entry wound....?

1. There is a large irregular defect of the scalp and skull on the right involving chiefly the parietal bone but extending somewhat into the temporal and occipital regions. In this region there is an actual absence of scalp and bone producing a defect which measures approximately 13 cm. in greatest diameter.

Feel free to point out this wound in the BOH photo.

But you won't...

The Moorman polaroid showed the back of the head wound quite clearly.



(From The Deeper Darker Truth by Phillips.)

Link showing the above from Phillips book.

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=09g2OmOodFoC&pg=PT203&dq=finck+burned+x+ray&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwix-LrryNLNAhXlLsAKHcIoAQIQ6AEIHjAA#v=onepage&q=finck%20burned%20x%20ray&f=false">https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=09g ... ay&f=false</a><!-- m -->

(Scroll up 21 pages)

"The Moorman polaroid showed the back of the head wound quite clearly."

Absolute abject nonsense. It is shade.

What did Jean Hill and Mary Moorman say about the wound which they were so close too....?

Are you trying to tell us that you think that whole area is a wound extending to the LEFT side of the head....?