[Ben Holmes]

Henry Sienzant Wrote:And you didn't quote this, which explains why the frontal wound wasn't dissected:

Quote:Q: Now, Doctor, did you examine on the remains of the late President Kennedy a wound in the frontal neck region? 
A: At the time of the autopsy I saw in the front of the neck of President Kennedy a transversal, which means going sideways, a transversal incision which was made for the purpose of keeping the breathing of the President, and this is called a tracheotomy, t-r-a-c-h-e-o-t-o-m-y. I examined this wound made by a surgeon, it is very commonly found in unconscious patients, the incision is made to allow them to breathe. I did not see a wound of exit at that time, but the following day Dr. Humes called the surgeons of Dallas and he was told that they -- 
MR. OSER: 
I object to hearsay. 
BY MR. DYMOND: 
Q: You may not say what the surgeons in Dallas told Dr. Humes. That would be hearsay evidence. 
A: I have to base my interpretation on all the facts available and not on one fact only. When you have a wound of entry in the back of the neck and no wound of exit at the time of autopsy, when the X-rays I requested showed no bullets in the cadaver of the President, you need some other information to know where the bullet went. At the time of the autopsy there was a wound of entry in the back of the neck, no exit, no X-rays showing a bullet, that bullet has to be somewhere, so that information to me is of great importance. I insist on that point, and that telephone call to Dallas from Dr. Humes -- 
THE COURT: You may insist on the point, Doctor, but we are going to do it according to law. If it is legally objectionable, even if you insist, I am going to have to sustain the objection. Do you understand me, Mr. Dymond? 
MR. DYMOND: I do. 

It's curious you don't quote that. (original found here.)

No... what's curious is that Henry is desperate to mislead people about Finck's testimony, and why the prosectors didn't dissect the throat wound. Finck makes it very clear why he didn't, and Henry COULD NOT HAVE BEEN UNAWARE OF THIS!!!

So Henry simply lied.

Here's the relevant testimony concerning why the throat wound was not dissected:

Quote:Mr Oser: Doctor, speaking of the wound to the throat area of the President as you described it, after this bullet passed through the President’s throat in the manner in which you described it, would the President have been able to talk?
Col. Finck: I don’t know.
Mr Oser: Do you have an opinion?
Col. Finck: There are many factors influencing the ability to talk or not to talk after a shot.
Mr Oser: Did you have an occasion to dissect the track of that particular bullet in the victim as it lay on the autopsy table?
Col. Finck : I did not dissect the track in the neck.
Mr Oser: Why?
Col. Finck: This leads us into the disclosure of medical records.
Mr Oser: Your Honor, I would like an answer from the Colonel and I would ask The Court so to direct.
Judge: That is correct, you should answer, Doctor.
Col. Finck: We didn’t remove the organs of the neck.
Mr Oser: Why not, Doctor?
Col. Finck: For the reason that we were told to examine the head wounds and that the —
Mr Oser: Are you saying someone told you not to dissect the track?
Judge: Let him finish his answer.
Col. Finck: I was told that the family wanted an examination of the head, as I recall, the head and the chest, but the prosectors in this autopsy didn’t remove the organs of the neck, to my recollection.
Mr Oser: You have said that they did not. I want to know why didn’t you as an autopsy pathologist attempt to ascertain the track through the body which you had on the autopsy table in trying to ascertain the cause or causes of death? Why?
Col. Finck: I had the cause of death.
Mr Oser: Why did you not trace the track of the wound?
Col. Finck: As I recall I didn’t remove these organs from the neck.
Mr Oser: I didn’t hear you.
Col. Finck: I examined the wounds but I didn’t remove the organs of the neck.
Mr Oser: You said you didn’t do this; I am asking you why didn’t [you] do this as a pathologist?
Col. Finck: From what I recall I looked at the trachea, there was a tracheotomy wound the best I can remember, but I didn’t dissect or remove these organs.
Mr Oser: Your Honor, I would ask Your Honor to direct the witness to answer my question. I will ask you the question one more time: Why did you not dissect the track of the bullet wound that you have described today and you saw at the time of the autopsy at the time you examined the body? Why? I ask you to answer that question.
Col. Finck: As I recall I was told not to, but I don’t remember by whom.
Mr Oser: You were told not to but you don’t remember by whom?
Col. Finck: Right.
Mr Oser: Could it have been one of the Admirals or one of the Generals in the room?
Col. Finck: I don’t recall.
Mr Oser: Do you have any particular reason why you cannot recall at this time?
Col. Finck: Because we were told to examine the head and the chest cavity, and that doesn’t include the removal of the organs of the neck.
Mr Oser: You are one of the three autopsy specialists and pathologists at the time, and you saw what you described as an entrance wound in the neck area of the President of the United States who had just been assassinated, and you were only interested in the other wound but not interested in the track through his neck, is that what you are telling me?
Col. Finck: I was interested in the track and I had observed the conditions of bruising between the point of entry in the back of the neck and the point of exit at the front of the neck, which is entirely compatible with the bullet path.
Mr Oser: But you were told not to go into the area of the neck, is that your testimony?
Col. Finck: From what I recall, yes, but I don’t remember by whom.

Now, it's clear here that there was a reason that the throat wound was not dissected, and it's NOT the reason that Henry attempted to mislead everyone into believing with his quote.

Henry wanted you to believe that it had to do with the prosectors thinking it was merely a tracheotomy, and not because THEY WERE ORDERED NOT TO DO SO!

Henry rather blatantly lied... and yet it was a rather simple matter to catch him at it, as long as one knows the evidence ... and this is what Henry counts on - that lurkers don't know the evidence well enough to catch him lying.

This is one reason that believers are rare in forums such as this one, where their lies will merely be pointed out.