fragment depicted in an autopsy X-ray used to implicate Lee Harvey
Oswald in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy recently has
been found to be a faked artifact superimposed on the X-ray sometime
after JFK’s autopsy.
~ Jim Marrs – Videos
Such tampering with official evidence
could not have been accomplished without the knowledge of high-level
federal officials and adds considerable weight to the claims of
government cover-up in that tragic event.
The X-ray fabrication was the topic of a 2015 paper by Dr. David Dr. Mantik published in issue three of Medical Research Archives,
an international scientific peer-reviewed journal publishing articles
in all disciplines of medicine, with a focus on new research.
Oswald, an ex-Marine who had attempted to
defect to Russia in 1959, was identified in 1964 by President Lyndon B.
Johnson’s handpicked commission headed by Supreme Court Justice Earl
Warren as the lone assassin of President Kennedy.
The Warren Commission
concluded that Oswald had used a 6.5 mm Italian WWII carbine to shoot
Kennedy from the sixth-floor of a book depository building in downtown
Dallas on November 22, 1963.
In 1968, amid controversy over the
commission’s conclusion, the Justice Department selected four prominent
medical experts to review the JFK autopsy evidence. This became known as
the Clark Panel, named after then-Atty. General Ramsey Clark.
Although, the panels’ report was delayed
until after the New Orleans JFK conspiracy trial led by Dist. Atty. Jim
Garrison, in 1969 it concluded that the Warren Commission had been
correct in its major findings though some issues remained in question,
such as the location of the president’s head wound.
Interestingly, it was this Clark Panel
report that first mentioned a fragment said to be from a 6.5 mm bullet
found in the anterior-posterior (AP) X-ray of Kennedy’s skull.
of this fragment became a critical piece of evidence, although it was
not mentioned anywhere in the 26-volumes of the Warren Commission nor in
the original autopsy report.
The most curious mystery in the history of radiology
The fragment in question has been
described as “the most curious – and unsolved – mystery in the history
of diagnostic radiology.”
Larry Sturdivan, a ballistics consultant
to the House Select Commission on Assassinations (HSCA), created by
Congress in 1976 in the midst of continuing controversy over Kennedy’s
death, studied this fragment and concluded the object could not be metal
and that he had never seen the cross-section of a bullet deposited in
such an odd fashion on a skull X-ray.
“I’m not sure just what that 6.5
mm fragment is,” reported Sturdivan. “One thing I’m sure it is NOT is a
cross-section from the interior of a bullet.
I have seen literally
thousands of bullets, deformed and un-deformed, after penetrating tissue
and tissue simulants.
Some were bent, some torn in two or more pieces,
but to have a cross-section sheared out is physically impossible. That
fragment has a lot of mystery associated with it.”
Mystery indeed, as the HSCA had relied on
the authenticity of this fragment as key evidence in connecting the 6.5
mm bullet piece to Lee Harvey Oswald.
Furthermore, the Assassination Records
Review Board (ARRB), formed by Congress in 1994 to study all government
documents relating to the assassination, the three JFK autopsy doctors
testified under oath that they had never seen such a fragment during the
Artifact was added to the X-ray with a double exposure
The mystery deepened in 2015 with the
work of Dr. David Mantik, a California physician, who along with Dr.
Cyril Wecht, a former president of the American Academy of Forensic
Science, had studied the JFK X-rays and other material for nine days at
the National Archives.
“Hundreds of optical density measurements were
made from the (supposed) original skull X-rays, with a specific focus on
the 6.5 mm object that lies within JFK’s right orbit on the AP skull
X-ray,” said Dr. Mantik.
After careful study, Dr. Mantik saw the
fragment was strangely transparent. He realized this artifact had been
added to the JFK X-ray in the darkroom. He explained it was accomplished
by means of a double exposure of a 6.5 mm aperture, such as a 6.5 mm
hole in a piece of cardboard.
“[T]he first step was to imprint the
image from the original X-ray onto a duplicate film (via a light box in
the dark room). The second step was another exposure that imprinted the
6.5 mm image onto the duplicate film (i.e., superimposing it over the
image of the original X-ray).
This duplicate film was then developed to
yield the image [as it appears in the X-ray].
This process inevitably
produces a phantom effect, whereby objects (e.g., bullet fragments in
this case) on the original film are seen separately [emphasis in
the original]from the superimposed 6.5 mm image.
On JFK’s AP skull
X-ray, the original metal fragment (that lay at the back of the skull)
can be seen separately through the 6.5 mm image.”
Dr. Mantik added that the double exposure
was so unprofessional it produced a significant overexposure of the 6.5
mm image. He even found one tiny particle of bullet metal inside the
6.5 mm object, indicating the use of a well-known Hollywood technique
using photographic double exposure.
Using studies of optical density, which
differentiates the lightness or darkness of specific points on X-ray
film, Dr. Mantik was able to determine that some time before the 1968
Clark Panel, someone in a darkroom had superimposed the fake bullet
fragment onto Kennedy’s X-ray.
Following his extensive study of this
issue, Dr. Mantik concluded, “This mysterious 6.5 mm image was
(secretly) added to the original X- ray via a second exposure.
alteration of the AP X-ray was likely completed shortly after the
autopsy. Its proximate purpose was to implicate Lee Harvey Oswald and
his supposed 6.5 mm Mannlicher-Carcano carbine, to the exclusion of any
other suspect, and thereby to rule out a possible conspiracy.”
Dr.Mantik said while the purpose of the
X-ray alteration could only have been to “implicate the 6.5 mm
Mannlicher-Carcano carbine (supposedly owned by Oswald) in the
Its ultimate purpose, however, awaits resolution by
professional historians, who have been remarkably reticent about
accepting responsibility for their task.”
Government hospital likely carried out the X-ray fraud
In his paper, Dr. Mantik identified Dr.
John H. Ebersole, the assistant chief radiologist at Bethesda Naval
Hospital, as the one person who had the means and opportunity to devise
the X-ray forgery.
Dr. Ebersole, aided by X-ray technicians Jerrol
Custer and Edward Reed, took the X-rays of Kennedy’s head the night of
the Autopsy. At that time no one saw any evidence of a bullet in the
Custer said the next day, contrary to protocol, he burned the
page in the duty log concerning the taking of Kennedy’s X-rays on the
order of Dr. Ebersole.
Custer also recalled that after the
autopsy he was instructed by Dr. Ebersole to make X-rays of bullet
fragments taped onto skull X-rays. However, no such X-rays were ever
made public. Mantik opined that probably it was decided “alteration was
easier to perform in the darkroom via a double exposure.”
Dr. Mantik also found that several weeks
after the assassination, Dr. Ebersole was called to the Johnson White
House ostensibly to assist in preparing a bust of Kennedy.
in my opinion, the reason for his summons to the White House was to see
how he would react to the now-altered X-rays,” said Dr. Mantik.
on this episode then, the alteration must have occurred within several
weeks (quite possibly immediately) after the assassination.”
He added that such actions might “explain
why the radiologist, Dr. Ebersole, refused to discuss this artifact
with me. After all, he was the single individual most likely to possess
the required expertise and creativity to perform X–ray alteration.”
Ebersole died in 1993, shortly after his conversation with Dr. Mantik.
X-RAY VS. AUTOPSY PHOTOGRAPH –
The vertical arrow on the X-ray, left, of
the anterior-posterior (AP) right side of Kennedy’s skull previously
has been identified as a fragment of a 6.5 mm carbine bullet and used to
link the wound to the rifle of Lee Harvey Oswald.
Dr. David W. Mantik,
after arduous study, found this evidence was a fabrication superimposed
on the X-ray sometime after Kennedy’s autopsy.
Also shown, at right, is
an altered X-ray that Mantik prepared to demonstrate how objects could
be superimposed on X-rays using techniques available in 1963.
“These are fake X-rays.”
In recent years, Custer has even
questioned the validity of the X-rays themselves. In 1992, after
studying the JFK X-rays in the National Archives, Custer declared,
“These are fake X-rays.”
Dr. Mantik’s conclusions have been
supported by others, including Dr, Michael Chesser, an Arkansas
neurologist, who noted,
“I viewed the original autopsy skull X-rays at
the archives this year  and I confirmed his optical density
readings of the lateral skull film, which support his conclusion that
there was manipulation.
Hopefully there will come a time when better
copies of the autopsy x-rays and photographs will be made available for
review by a wider audience and the evidence will speak for itself. I
applaud Dr. David Mantik for his courage in reporting the truth.”
Douglas P. Horne, the ARRB’s chief
analyst for military records including the Bethesda autopsy,
“The fact that Dr. Mantik’s scientific paper on the forgery
indicators present in the A-P skull x-ray has survived the rigorous
gauntlet of scientific peer review is further indication that his
arguments about the three surviving JFK skull x-rays are sound, and
worthy of the most serious consideration.
[I]t is no longer possible
for others who are not radiologists, or MDs (like he is), or who do not
hold PhDs in physics (like he does), to dismiss his work as that of a
“[I]n the mid-1990s, I recognized the
scientific validity of his pioneering work on the JFK skull X-rays, and
at my recommendation he was requested by Jeremy Gunn, the General
Counsel for the ARRB, to prepare questions for the three JFK autopsy
The answers the three JFK pathologists provided to his
questions, under oath, corroborated Mantik’s assertions that the three
skull x-rays in the official collection are indeed copy films (not
originals), and are altered images,” said Horne.
“The problem with the medical
evidence has always been missing and tainted evidence – the destruction
of some evidence, and the alteration of much of the evidence that
remains in the record today – [and] is representative of the fact that
the U.S. government engaged in a massive cover-up of the way in which
JFK died, and therefore intentionally engaged in selling the American
people a false bill of goods in regard to how our government changed
hands in November of 1963.”
September 8, 2015 – KnowTheLies.com
Source Article from http://www.knowthelies.com/node/10748
After an independent autopsy showed that Zachary Hammond was shot by police from behind, the family of the unarmed South Carolina teen is wondering at the lack of national outrage in this case. Hammond was white.
According to the police in Seneca, South Carolina, an officer shot Hammond “in self-defense” when the teen allegedly tried to run him over with a car during a drug arrest. An officer approached Hammond’s car in the parking lot of a Hardee’s restaurant on July 26, after an undercover officer arranged a marijuana buy with the teen’s date, 23-year-old Tori Morton. The initial police report mentions finding a bag of marijuana on Morton – who was charged with simple possession – but makes no note of the lethal shooting.
The official autopsy confirmed Hammond was shot twice, but did not say from what angle. Hammond’s family arranged for an independent autopsy, which showed the 19-year-old had been shot from above and behind, suggesting that the official police story was inaccurate.
Speaking to reporters on Tuesday, attorney for Hammond’s family Eric Bland said that Hammond had been shot in the left rear shoulder, and through the back of his chest, indicating the officer fired from the side of a stopped car, through the open window. Bland says Hammond was on a first date with Morton, who was eating ice cream at the time, and that the police should have never used deadly force.
Seneca is a city of 8,200 in the northwestern corner of South Carolina, near the university town of Clemson, and about 30 miles west of Greenville.
Hammond’s death came a week after Samuel Dubose was killed in Cincinnati, Ohio under very similar circumstances. University of Cincinnati police officer Raymond Tensing said Dubose was trying to run him over with his car, and that he fired in self-defense. Once Tensing’s body camera footage was released, showing otherwise, the officer was indicted for murder. Tensing is white; Dubose was black.
Dubose’s killing has attracted national attention, but Hammond’s was barely noticed. According to the Los Angeles Times, while Dubose’s name was mentioned in over 43,000 tweets between July 26 and August 4, Hammond’s appeared in 289 tweets in the same time period.
Bland, the attorney for Hammond’s family, finds the discrepancy “very disturbing.”
“An unarmed white teenager whose life is wrongfully taken at the hands of overzealous police is the same and equal to an unarmed black teenager whose life is wrongfully taken at the hands of overzealous police,” he told the LA Times.
Police in Seneca are standing by their officer, though. Speaking to the Greenville News last week, Chief John Covington said the officer “actually had his hand on or very close to the car, possibly pushed off from the car,” and the teen “was not shot from behind.”
“The attorney wasn’t there either,” Covington said. “He’s got to put his spin on things. His clients are the parents and they’re grieving. I understand that. My heart goes out to them.”
Seneca police’s refusal to publish the official autopsy results or name the officer involved in the fatal shooting has raised eyebrows. The Charleston Post and Courier filed an open records request for the officer’s name, and the copy of the official incident report, neither of which have been released by the police.
“It’s outrageous,” Bill Rogers, executive director of the South Carolina Press Association, told the Post and Courier. “The policeman is a public official. They can’t redact his name. That’s a clear violation of the law.”
“We feel that releasing his name may possibly subject the officer and family to harassment, intimidation or abuse,” Chief Covington said in a statement, explaining that the department considers the officer a “victim of attempted murder” by Hammond.
Rogers says this argument lacks merit and that the public has a right to know. “Other people might have had encounters with this policeman but they can’t come forward if the public doesn’t know who it is,” he said.
Hammond’s death is currently being investigated by the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division (SLED). There had been 30 fatal police shootings in the state this year, as of August 3, compared to 42 in all of 2014, according to the LA Times.
“The whole issue of race is getting distorted and what’s getting lost is the real issue which is excessive force,” Bland told the Washington Post. “All people need to be outraged out this. All people need to be asking the hard questions.”
- Planned Parenthood Demands Media Not Air Damning Footage
- Education Department’s Support for Gay Marriage Sparks Outrage
- US Special Forces Train With Cops For House to House Raids
- TPP trade deal ‘a disaster’, other countries will ‘dupe’ US – Donald Trump
- Black Crime Facts That The Liberal Media Daren’t Talk About
Source Article from http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/TheEuropeanUnionTimes/~3/X4-wKC-F5m8/