Discussion:
More questions for Gil
(too old to reply)
JE Corbett
2023-12-04 13:31:04 UTC
Permalink
Do you deny that there was a flap of skull on the right side of JFK's head that
was blown open by the headshot?

Do you agree that the blowout, or defect as the autopsy report described it,
extended from the back of the head (occipital) along the upper right side
of the head (parietal and temporal)?

Do you have any explanation for why none of the Parkland ER team made any
mention of the blowout along the upper right side of the head?
Ben Holmes
2023-12-04 15:37:34 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 4 Dec 2023 05:31:04 -0800 (PST), JE Corbett
Post by JE Corbett
Do you deny that there was a flap of skull on the right side of JFK's head that
was blown open by the headshot?
Yes.

And no.

While it's cerrtainly possible that it existed in Parkland, it's also
quite reasonable to explain it as part of the pre-autopsy autopsy.
That would *also* explain why it wasn't seen at Parkland.

Note: Corbutt has offered *NO* reason why it wasn't seen at Parkland.
Post by JE Corbett
Do you agree that the blowout, or defect as the autopsy report described it,
extended from the back of the head (occipital) along the upper right side
of the head (parietal and temporal)?
Yes. What part of the occipital is *NOT* in the back of the head? And
why has EVERY SINGLE BELIEVER IN THIS FORUM refused repeatedly to
answer this question?
Post by JE Corbett
Do you have any explanation for why none of the Parkland ER team made any
mention of the blowout along the upper right side of the head?
Sure. Already given above. You, on the other hand, have refused to
offer an explanation.
Gil Jesus
2023-12-04 17:12:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ben Holmes
While it's cerrtainly possible that it existed in Parkland, it's also
quite reasonable to explain it as part of the pre-autopsy autopsy.
That would *also* explain why it wasn't seen at Parkland.
In 1995, Janie Taylor relayed an allegation told to her by the brother of an African-American orderly who was allegedly present in the autopsy room. Taylor said that, "when the body arrived, many people were forced out of the room and the doctor performed some type of mutilation of the THREE bullet punctures to the head area. The doctor was working at a very "hurried" pace and was done within a few minutes, at which point he left the autopsy room." ( ARRB MD 45 )

Jerrold Custer told the ARRB that he saw the "flap" pictured in the BOH autopsy photo and said that it "looked as if they had sawed it." ( Custer testimony to ARRB, 10-28-97, pg. 96 )
Loading Image...

Of course, they would never do something like that.
Gil Jesus
2023-12-04 17:28:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gil Jesus
Post by Ben Holmes
While it's cerrtainly possible that it existed in Parkland, it's also
quite reasonable to explain it as part of the pre-autopsy autopsy.
That would *also* explain why it wasn't seen at Parkland.
In 1995, Janie Taylor relayed an allegation told to her by the brother of an African-American orderly who was allegedly present in the autopsy room. Taylor said that, "when the body arrived, many people were forced out of the room and the doctor performed some type of mutilation of the THREE bullet punctures to the head area. The doctor was working at a very "hurried" pace and was done within a few minutes, at which point he left the autopsy room." ( ARRB MD 45 )
Jerrold Custer told the ARRB that he saw the "flap" pictured in the BOH autopsy photo and said that it "looked as if they had sawed it." ( Custer testimony to ARRB, 10-28-97, pg. 96 )
https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/BE4_HI.jpg
Of course, they would never do something like that.
Except that FBI agent Frank O'Neill told the ARRB that as soon as the body was brought into the morgue, he and his partner James Sibert, long with Secret Service agents Kellerman and Greer, were asked to leave the autopsy room by Humes and Boswell. ( O'Neill testimony to the ARRB, 9-12-97, pg. 62 )
Ben Holmes
2023-12-04 18:00:09 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 4 Dec 2023 09:28:15 -0800 (PST), Gil Jesus
Post by Gil Jesus
Post by Gil Jesus
Post by Ben Holmes
While it's cerrtainly possible that it existed in Parkland, it's also
quite reasonable to explain it as part of the pre-autopsy autopsy.
That would *also* explain why it wasn't seen at Parkland.
In 1995, Janie Taylor relayed an allegation told to her by the brother of an African-American orderly who was allegedly present in the autopsy room. Taylor said that, "when the body arrived, many people were forced out of the room and the doctor performed some type of mutilation of the THREE bullet punctures to the head area. The doctor was working at a very "hurried" pace and was done within a few minutes, at which point he left the autopsy room." ( ARRB MD 45 )
Jerrold Custer told the ARRB that he saw the "flap" pictured in the BOH autopsy photo and said that it "looked as if they had sawed it." ( Custer testimony to ARRB, 10-28-97, pg. 96 )
https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/BE4_HI.jpg
Of course, they would never do something like that.
Except that FBI agent Frank O'Neill told the ARRB that as soon as
the body was brought into the morgue, he and his partner James Sibert,
long with Secret Service agents Kellerman and Greer, were asked to
leave the autopsy room by Humes and Boswell. ( O'Neill testimony to
the ARRB, 9-12-97, pg. 62 )
This is supporting evidence for the pre-autopsy autopsy - that
believers have no answer for. Denial is their only tactic.
JE Corbett
2023-12-04 18:51:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gil Jesus
Post by Gil Jesus
Post by Ben Holmes
While it's cerrtainly possible that it existed in Parkland, it's also
quite reasonable to explain it as part of the pre-autopsy autopsy.
That would *also* explain why it wasn't seen at Parkland.
In 1995, Janie Taylor relayed an allegation told to her by the brother of an African-American orderly who was allegedly present in the autopsy room. Taylor said that, "when the body arrived, many people were forced out of the room and the doctor performed some type of mutilation of the THREE bullet punctures to the head area. The doctor was working at a very "hurried" pace and was done within a few minutes, at which point he left the autopsy room." ( ARRB MD 45 )
Jerrold Custer told the ARRB that he saw the "flap" pictured in the BOH autopsy photo and said that it "looked as if they had sawed it." ( Custer testimony to ARRB, 10-28-97, pg. 96 )
https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/BE4_HI.jpg
Of course, they would never do something like that.
Except that FBI agent Frank O'Neill told the ARRB that as soon as the body was brought into the morgue, he and his partner James Sibert, long with Secret Service agents Kellerman and Greer, were asked to leave the autopsy room by Humes and Boswell. ( O'Neill testimony to the ARRB, 9-12-97, pg. 62 )
OK. Let's grade Giltardo using his grading system.

Number of questions answered: 0
Number of correct answers: 0
Percent of questions answered correctly: 0%
Grade: F

Giltardo never deals with the tough questions. He chooses diversion instead. He changes the subject by bringing up
irrelevant observations. The questions were straight forward enough. Giltardo had no answer for them that would be
consistent with the myths for which he is advocating. He wants to claim the back of the head was blown out when he
knows that the blowout wasn't limited to the back of the head but extended all along the upper right side. He suggests,
without actually claiming, that the skull flap was created by a bone saw. That doesn't explain why that flap appeared
immediately following the head shot. But if Giltardo was to acknowledge that the flap was caused by the headshot, that
would destroy his argument that a blowout in the back of the head is evidence of a frontal shot, so rather than deal with
that pesky flap, he simply ignores it. That way he can maintain his silly make believe myths of the assassination.

Giltardo's beliefs have never stood up to critical questioning. Never will. That's why he ALWAYS avoid the tough questions.
Gil Jesus
2023-12-04 19:02:28 UTC
Permalink
On Monday, December 4, 2023 at 1:51:59 PM UTC-5, JE Corbett wrote:
< another post full of comments and insults but no evidence >

The guy who NEVER answers my questions is mad because I won't answer his.
ROFLMAO
Ben Holmes
2023-12-04 19:15:49 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 4 Dec 2023 11:02:28 -0800 (PST), Gil Jesus
Post by Gil Jesus
< another post full of comments and insults but no evidence >
The guy who NEVER answers my questions is mad because I won't answer his.
ROFLMAO
Corbutt's a coward, what do you expect?
JE Corbett
2023-12-04 19:19:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gil Jesus
< another post full of comments and insults but no evidence >
The guy who NEVER answers my questions is mad because I won't answer his.
ROFLMAO
It's not that you won't. It's that you can't. You know the answers destroy your narrative so as always, you dodge them.

My answers are the ones found in the history books and accepted by virtually every reputable source. Oswald was the
assassin. I acknowledge the widespread belief he had accomplices, but I've never seen any compelling evidence of
such. I am satisfied with the historical narrative as is. You on the other hand are the one wanting to change that historical
narrative. To do that you are going to have to make the case for Oswald's innocence, and you aren't going to be able to
do that unless you grow a pair and start dealing with the inconvenient truths. The inconvenient truth on this matter is
that the entire upper right side of JFK's skull was blown open, from the occipital bone, to through the parietal bone, and
into the temporal bone. The inconvenient truth doesn't jive with your false narrative that the headshot came from the front
and blew out the back of the head, so you simply choose to avoid that truth by avoiding any questions posed to you regarding
the defect in the skull.

I have yet to see you respond to my pointing out of your false claim that there was outward beveling in rear of the skull. I
quoted the passage from the autopsy report that indicated the beveling was inward. I know this is another inconvenient truth
for you to dodge so I am not expecting your response.
Ben Holmes
2023-12-04 19:20:57 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 4 Dec 2023 11:19:21 -0800 (PST), JE Corbett
Post by JE Corbett
Post by Gil Jesus
< another post full of comments and insults but no evidence >
The guy who NEVER answers my questions is mad because I won't answer his.
ROFLMAO
It's not that you won't. It's that you can't.
Proven false by my answers already posted.

You're a proven liar, aren't you?

I've deleted the rest of your logical fallacy ranting, since it's
based on a lie.
Gil Jesus
2023-12-04 19:34:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by JE Corbett
It's not that you won't. It's that you can't. You know the answers destroy your narrative so as always, you dodge them.
No I don't answer your questions because Ben already has.
Idiot.
JE Corbett
2023-12-04 19:41:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gil Jesus
Post by JE Corbett
It's not that you won't. It's that you can't. You know the answers destroy your narrative so as always, you dodge them.
No I don't answer your questions because Ben already has.
Idiot.
You and your lapdog are both full of shit.
Ben Holmes
2023-12-04 20:46:09 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 4 Dec 2023 11:41:56 -0800 (PST), JE Corbett
Post by JE Corbett
Post by Gil Jesus
Post by JE Corbett
It's not that you won't. It's that you can't. You know the answers destroy your narrative so as always, you dodge them.
No I don't answer your questions because Ben already has.
Idiot.
You and your lapdog are both full of shit.
Prove it.

But you can't, can you? It's always quite impossible to "prove" lies.
Ben Holmes
2023-12-04 19:13:08 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 4 Dec 2023 10:51:57 -0800 (PST), JE Corbett
Post by JE Corbett
Post by Gil Jesus
Post by Gil Jesus
Post by Ben Holmes
While it's cerrtainly possible that it existed in Parkland, it's also
quite reasonable to explain it as part of the pre-autopsy autopsy.
That would *also* explain why it wasn't seen at Parkland.
In 1995, Janie Taylor relayed an allegation told to her by the brother of an African-American orderly who was allegedly present in the autopsy room. Taylor said that, "when the body arrived, many people were forced out of the room and the doctor performed some type of mutilation of the THREE bullet punctures to the head area. The doctor was working at a very "hurried" pace and was done within a few minutes, at which point he left the autopsy room." ( ARRB MD 45 )
Jerrold Custer told the ARRB that he saw the "flap" pictured in the BOH autopsy photo and said that it "looked as if they had sawed it." ( Custer testimony to ARRB, 10-28-97, pg. 96 )
https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/BE4_HI.jpg
Of course, they would never do something like that.
Except that FBI agent Frank O'Neill told the ARRB that as soon as the body was brought into the morgue, he and his partner James Sibert, long with Secret Service agents Kellerman and Greer, were asked to leave the autopsy room by Humes and Boswell. ( O'Neill testimony to the ARRB, 9-12-97, pg. 62 )
OK. Let's grade Giltardo using his grading system.
Number of questions answered: 0
Number of correct answers: 0
Percent of questions answered correctly: 0%
Grade: F
Of course, Gil recognized that all questions had already been
answered.

I deleted the rest of your logical fallacy rant.

You're clearly and provably a coward who can't handle my answers to
your questions.
Hank Sienzant
2023-12-05 02:13:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gil Jesus
Post by Ben Holmes
While it's cerrtainly possible that it existed in Parkland, it's also
quite reasonable to explain it as part of the pre-autopsy autopsy.
That would *also* explain why it wasn't seen at Parkland.
In 1995, Janie Taylor relayed an allegation told to her by the brother of an African-American orderly
Name of this orderly person? Name of the brother? She wasn't at liberty to reveal any of this? Who is Janie Taylor and why should anyone believe her?

This story first surfaces 32 years after the assassination, is hearsay twice removed from the supposed source, and you feel it’s worthy of mention?

You must not have anything better if you lead with that.
Post by Gil Jesus
who was allegedly present in the autopsy room. Taylor said that, "when the body arrived, many people were forced out of the room and the doctor performed some type of mutilation of the THREE bullet punctures to the head area. The doctor was working at a very "hurried" pace and was done within a few minutes, at which point he left the autopsy room." ( ARRB MD 45 )
And you think this story is credible enough to repeat here?
Post by Gil Jesus
Jerrold Custer told the ARRB that he saw the "flap" pictured in the BOH autopsy photo and said that it "looked as if they had sawed it." ( Custer testimony to ARRB, 10-28-97, pg. 96 )
https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/BE4_HI.jpg
Where did Custer get his medical degree that he can see sawing that escaped the notice of the HSCA medical panel as well as the three autopsists?

This is the problem inherent throughout the critical literature.

Critics ignore the hard evidence, discard the first hand eyewitness accounts, accept second- or third-hand hearsay, and ignore the actual experts and accept non-expert accounts from decades later.
Post by Gil Jesus
Of course, they would never do something like that.
Why would ‘they’ do anything like that, when ‘they’ could have simply exposed JFK’s affairs and had him voted out of office? This means ‘they’ are not committing treason. This doesn't sound like a bizarre plan to you — shoot JFK from multiple directions, then attempt to frame a lone shooter, and then have to alter or substitute all the evidence that doesn't point to the appointed patsy?

What was the plan if Connally or someone else was shot from the knoll or other than the TSBD? Or if the President survived? How do you alter the wounds on a living person, or explain a bullet entry wound in the neck but no exit?

What’s the plan?
NoTrueFlags Here
2023-12-05 02:33:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Hank Sienzant
And you think this story is credible enough to repeat here?
Ah yes! Here in the Sacred Temple Of Truth! But, then again, Hank Seinzant said here that Harold Weisberg's brother-in-law vouched for the eyesight of Nutter Star Witness Howard Brenan, so who's counting?
Gil Jesus
2023-12-05 09:41:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Hank Sienzant
Post by Gil Jesus
Post by Ben Holmes
While it's cerrtainly possible that it existed in Parkland, it's also
quite reasonable to explain it as part of the pre-autopsy autopsy.
That would *also* explain why it wasn't seen at Parkland.
In 1995, Janie Taylor relayed an allegation told to her by the brother of an African-American orderly
Name of this orderly person? Name of the brother? She wasn't at liberty to reveal any of this? Who is Janie Taylor and why should anyone believe her?
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=626
Post by Hank Sienzant
This story first surfaces 32 years after the assassination, is hearsay twice removed from the supposed source, and you feel it’s worthy of mention?
You believe Jack Ray Tatum, don't you ?
Post by Hank Sienzant
You must not have anything better if you lead with that.
Post by Gil Jesus
who was allegedly present in the autopsy room. Taylor said that, "when the body arrived, many people were forced out of the room and the doctor performed some type of mutilation of the THREE bullet punctures to the head area. The doctor was working at a very "hurried" pace and was done within a few minutes, at which point he left the autopsy room." ( ARRB MD 45 )
And you think this story is credible enough to repeat here?
I said it was an allegation, stupid.
Post by Hank Sienzant
Post by Gil Jesus
Jerrold Custer told the ARRB that he saw the "flap" pictured in the BOH autopsy photo and said that it "looked as if they had sawed it." ( Custer testimony to ARRB, 10-28-97, pg. 96 )
https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/BE4_HI.jpg
Where did Custer get his medical degree that he can see sawing that escaped the notice of the HSCA medical panel as well as the three autopsists?
Since when do you need a medical degree to have an opinion ?
Post by Hank Sienzant
This is the problem inherent throughout the critical literature.
Critics ignore the hard evidence, discard the first hand eyewitness accounts, accept second- or third-hand hearsay, and ignore the actual experts and accept non-expert accounts from decades later.
You mean hard evidence like the wounds tests ?

You mean hard evidence like the rifle tests ?

You mean discounting first hand witnesses like these ?

You mean accepting second or third hand hearsay like you do from the Dallas Police, Secret Service and FBI ?
Post by Hank Sienzant
This doesn't sound like a bizarre plan to you — shoot JFK from multiple directions, then attempt to frame a lone shooter, and then have to alter or substitute all the evidence that doesn't point to the appointed patsy?
How do you alter the wounds on a living person,
JFK was dead.

or explain a bullet entry wound in the neck but no exit?

There are examples of bullets being lodged in the throat.

https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/Was-JFK-Trying-To-Cough-Up-A-Bullet.mp4

Now you explain us how you can have a transiting bullet without a bullet track through the body.
Or are you going to "ignore the hard evidence" from your "actual experts" that they couldn't establish one ?
JE Corbett
2023-12-05 13:34:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gil Jesus
Post by Hank Sienzant
Post by Gil Jesus
Post by Ben Holmes
While it's cerrtainly possible that it existed in Parkland, it's also
quite reasonable to explain it as part of the pre-autopsy autopsy.
That would *also* explain why it wasn't seen at Parkland.
In 1995, Janie Taylor relayed an allegation told to her by the brother of an African-American orderly
Name of this orderly person? Name of the brother? She wasn't at liberty to reveal any of this? Who is Janie Taylor and why should anyone believe her?
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=626
Post by Hank Sienzant
This story first surfaces 32 years after the assassination, is hearsay twice removed from the supposed source, and you feel it’s worthy of mention?
You believe Jack Ray Tatum, don't you ?
Post by Hank Sienzant
You must not have anything better if you lead with that.
Post by Gil Jesus
who was allegedly present in the autopsy room. Taylor said that, "when the body arrived, many people were forced out of the room and the doctor performed some type of mutilation of the THREE bullet punctures to the head area. The doctor was working at a very "hurried" pace and was done within a few minutes, at which point he left the autopsy room." ( ARRB MD 45 )
And you think this story is credible enough to repeat here?
I said it was an allegation, stupid.
Post by Hank Sienzant
Post by Gil Jesus
Jerrold Custer told the ARRB that he saw the "flap" pictured in the BOH autopsy photo and said that it "looked as if they had sawed it." ( Custer testimony to ARRB, 10-28-97, pg. 96 )
https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/BE4_HI.jpg
Where did Custer get his medical degree that he can see sawing that escaped the notice of the HSCA medical panel as well as the three autopsists?
Since when do you need a medical degree to have an opinion ?
Opinions are like assholes. Everybody has one. For an opinion to have evidentiary value requires the person rendering he
opinion to have expertise in the field he is offering that opinion. Custer has no such expertise and therefore his opinion has
no evidentiary value.
Post by Gil Jesus
Post by Hank Sienzant
This is the problem inherent throughout the critical literature.
Critics ignore the hard evidence, discard the first hand eyewitness accounts, accept second- or third-hand hearsay, and ignore the actual experts and accept non-expert accounts from decades later.
You mean hard evidence like the wounds tests ?
The wounds tests are evidence. Your interpretation of them is not.
Post by Gil Jesus
You mean hard evidence like the rifle tests ?
The rifle tests are evidence. Your interpretation of them is not.
Post by Gil Jesus
You mean discounting first hand witnesses like these ?
Who?
Post by Gil Jesus
You mean accepting second or third hand hearsay like you do from the Dallas Police, Secret Service and FBI ?
The body of evidence against Oswald doesn't include any of these. There might be examples of these but they are not part
of the body of evidence.
Post by Gil Jesus
Post by Hank Sienzant
This doesn't sound like a bizarre plan to you — shoot JFK from multiple directions, then attempt to frame a lone shooter, and then have to alter or substitute all the evidence that doesn't point to the appointed patsy?
How do you alter the wounds on a living person,
JFK was dead.
Even harder. Wounds on a living person can heal. Not on a dead person. Only a complete idiot would buy into Lifton's loony
theory of body alteration.
Post by Gil Jesus
or explain a bullet entry wound in the neck but no exit?
There are examples of bullets being lodged in the throat.
Not examples of bullets fired from a rifle at long distance. Such bullets are going to pass through the neck or strike the spine
paralyzing the victim as happened to MLK. The bullet that struck him went through his jawbone and into his spine.
Post by Gil Jesus
https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/Was-JFK-Trying-To-Cough-Up-A-Bullet.mp4
Now you explain us how you can have a transiting bullet without a bullet track through the body.
There was a bullet track through the body, idiot. There was a contusion of the pleura, perforation of the strap muscles, and
damage to the trachea, all in a direct line from the entry wound to the incision on the throat that was made over the exit wound.
Post by Gil Jesus
Or are you going to "ignore the hard evidence" from your "actual experts" that they couldn't establish one ?
Read Finck's testimony at the Clay Shaw trial. He explained why a probe wouldn't pass easily through the bullet track and why
you don't try to force the probe through the track. The track of the bullet wasn't established through a probe but by opening up
the chest cavity, removing the internal organs, and observing the tissue damage, all of which I listed above.
Ben Holmes
2023-12-05 16:17:36 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 5 Dec 2023 05:34:25 -0800 (PST), JE Corbett
Post by JE Corbett
Opinions are like assholes. Everybody has one.
Said the head asshole.
Gil Jesus
2023-12-05 12:25:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Hank Sienzant
Name of this orderly person? Name of the brother? She wasn't at liberty to reveal any of this? Who is Janie Taylor and why should anyone believe her?
This story first surfaces 32 years after the assassination, is hearsay twice removed from the supposed source, and you feel it’s worthy of mention?
You must not have anything better if you lead with that.
Post by Gil Jesus
who was allegedly present in the autopsy room. Taylor said that, "when the body arrived, many people were forced out of the room and the doctor performed some type of mutilation of the THREE bullet punctures to the head area. The doctor was working at a very "hurried" pace and was done within a few minutes, at which point he left the autopsy room." ( ARRB MD 45 )
And you think this story is credible enough to repeat here?
This is the problem inherent throughout the critical literature.
Critics ignore the hard evidence, discard the first hand eyewitness accounts, accept second- or third-hand hearsay, and ignore the actual experts and accept non-expert accounts from decades later.
Janie Taylor gave her testimony to the ARRB on 11/24/95.
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=626

FBI agent Frank O'Neill revealed to the ARRB in Sept. 1997 that he, his partner Sibert and SS agents Kellerman and Greer were asked to leave the autopsy room by Drs. Humes and Boswell.
( O'Neill testimony to the ARRB 9/12/97, pg. 62; also see ARRB Medical Document 189, pg. 5 )

Since you're attempting to impeach the credibility of Janie Taylor and/or her sources and since you're the "more knowledgeable" one, maybe you can answer this question for me:

How did Janie Taylor and/or her sources know that people were asked to leave the autopsy room almost TWO YEARS before Frank O'Neill revealed it to the ARRB ?
Gil Jesus
2023-12-05 12:44:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Hank Sienzant
Name of this orderly person? Name of the brother? She wasn't at liberty to reveal any of this? Who is Janie Taylor and why should anyone believe her?
She didn't come forward stupid. The ARRB sought HER out.
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=626

And she never told anyone because she thought that the information was under a secrecy order.
She had to be advised by the ARRB that the secrecy order had been lifted in 1977 before she talked to them.
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=626
Post by Hank Sienzant
This story first surfaces 32 years after the assassination, is hearsay twice removed from the supposed source, and you feel it’s worthy of mention?
Yes I do because it's partially corroborated by someone who was at the autopsy.
Post by Hank Sienzant
You must not have anything better if you lead with that. And you think this story is credible enough to repeat here?
Yes I do because it's partially corroborated.
Post by Hank Sienzant
This is the problem inherent throughout the critical literature.
Critics ignore the hard evidence, discard the first hand eyewitness accounts, accept second- or third-hand hearsay, and ignore the actual experts and accept non-expert accounts from decades later.
Janie Taylor gave her testimony to the ARRB on 11/24/95. part of that testimony included the fact that people were asked to leave the autopsy room.
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=626

FBI agent Frank O'Neill revealed to the ARRB in Sept. 1997 that he, his partner Sibert, SS agents Kellerman and Greer and non-medical personnel were asked to leave the autopsy room by Drs. Humes and Boswell.
( O'Neill testimony to the ARRB 9/12/97, pg. 62; also see ARRB Medical Document 189, pg. 5 )

Since you're attempting to impeach the credibility of Janie Taylor and/or her sources and since you're the "more knowledgeable" one, maybe you can answer this question for me:

How did Janie Taylor and/or her sources know that people were asked to leave the autopsy room almost TWO YEARS before Frank O'Neill revealed it to the ARRB ?
Hank Sienzant
2023-12-07 22:28:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gil Jesus
Post by Hank Sienzant
Name of this orderly person? Name of the brother? She wasn't at liberty to reveal any of this? Who is Janie Taylor and why should anyone believe her?
She didn't come forward stupid. The ARRB sought HER out.
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=626
And she never told anyone because she thought that the information was under a secrecy order.
She had to be advised by the ARRB that the secrecy order had been lifted in 1977 before she talked to them.
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=626
Post by Hank Sienzant
This story first surfaces 32 years after the assassination, is hearsay twice removed from the supposed source, and you feel it’s worthy of mention?
Yes I do because it's partially corroborated by someone who was at the autopsy.
Post by Hank Sienzant
You must not have anything better if you lead with that. And you think this story is credible enough to repeat here?
Yes I do because it's partially corroborated.
Post by Hank Sienzant
This is the problem inherent throughout the critical literature.
Critics ignore the hard evidence, discard the first hand eyewitness accounts, accept second- or third-hand hearsay, and ignore the actual experts and accept non-expert accounts from decades later.
Janie Taylor gave her testimony to the ARRB on 11/24/95. part of that testimony included the fact that people were asked to leave the autopsy room.
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=626
FBI agent Frank O'Neill revealed to the ARRB in Sept. 1997 that he, his partner Sibert, SS agents Kellerman and Greer and non-medical personnel were asked to leave the autopsy room by Drs. Humes and Boswell.
( O'Neill testimony to the ARRB 9/12/97, pg. 62; also see ARRB Medical Document 189, pg. 5 )
How did Janie Taylor and/or her sources know that people were asked to leave the autopsy room almost TWO YEARS before Frank O'Neill revealed it to the ARRB ?
Even a broken clock is right twice a day. What evidence have you uncovered of her brother’s name? Of the supposed orderly/janitor’s name?
Ben Holmes
2023-12-07 22:56:44 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 7 Dec 2023 14:28:42 -0800 (PST), Hank Sienzant
Post by Hank Sienzant
Even a broken clock is right twice a day.
But Huckster is ALWAYS a coward:

You've claimed that the "A.B.C.D." in the Autopsy Report is the
description of the *location* of the large head wound.

Yet you refuse time and time again from QUOTING the preceding
paragraph that describes what this ACTUALLY is. Why is that?

You've also claimed that the prosectors dissected the throat wound.

Why do you continue to refuse to cite any evidence for this?

Why have you CONSISTENTLY run away each time I raise this issue?

Now you've quite stupidly insisted that the bullet entered JFK's back,
and exited the back of his head.

More cowardice, more stupidity, more dishonesty.

Are you proud of yourself?
Gil Jesus
2023-12-07 23:26:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Hank Sienzant
Post by Gil Jesus
Post by Hank Sienzant
Name of this orderly person? Name of the brother? She wasn't at liberty to reveal any of this? Who is Janie Taylor and why should anyone believe her?
She didn't come forward stupid. The ARRB sought HER out.
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=626
And she never told anyone because she thought that the information was under a secrecy order.
She had to be advised by the ARRB that the secrecy order had been lifted in 1977 before she talked to them.
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=626
Post by Hank Sienzant
This story first surfaces 32 years after the assassination, is hearsay twice removed from the supposed source, and you feel it’s worthy of mention?
Yes I do because it's partially corroborated by someone who was at the autopsy.
Post by Hank Sienzant
You must not have anything better if you lead with that. And you think this story is credible enough to repeat here?
Yes I do because it's partially corroborated.
Post by Hank Sienzant
This is the problem inherent throughout the critical literature.
Critics ignore the hard evidence, discard the first hand eyewitness accounts, accept second- or third-hand hearsay, and ignore the actual experts and accept non-expert accounts from decades later.
Janie Taylor gave her testimony to the ARRB on 11/24/95. part of that testimony included the fact that people were asked to leave the autopsy room.
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=626
FBI agent Frank O'Neill revealed to the ARRB in Sept. 1997 that he, his partner Sibert, SS agents Kellerman and Greer and non-medical personnel were asked to leave the autopsy room by Drs. Humes and Boswell.
( O'Neill testimony to the ARRB 9/12/97, pg. 62; also see ARRB Medical Document 189, pg. 5 )
How did Janie Taylor and/or her sources know that people were asked to leave the autopsy room almost TWO YEARS before Frank O'Neill revealed it to the ARRB ?
Even a broken clock is right twice a day.
How is that even applicable here ? How could she have known people were asked to leave the autopsy room if someone who was there didn't tell her ?
Post by Hank Sienzant
What evidence have you uncovered of her brother’s name?
It wasn't HER brother, it as the orderly's brother who told her.

Of the supposed orderly/janitor’s name?
It's in the document at the link I posted above Hank. If you have to keep asking the same question over and over again, it's because you're not clicking on the link, ala Bud.

You have this story all fucked up. Did you even read the document ?
Or are you another gradutae of the John Corbett School of Reading Comprehension ?
Ben Holmes
2023-12-08 00:08:21 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 7 Dec 2023 15:26:16 -0800 (PST), Gil Jesus
Post by Gil Jesus
Post by Hank Sienzant
Post by Gil Jesus
Post by Hank Sienzant
Name of this orderly person? Name of the brother? She wasn't at liberty to reveal any of this? Who is Janie Taylor and why should anyone believe her?
She didn't come forward stupid. The ARRB sought HER out.
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=626
And she never told anyone because she thought that the information was under a secrecy order.
She had to be advised by the ARRB that the secrecy order had been lifted in 1977 before she talked to them.
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=626
Post by Hank Sienzant
This story first surfaces 32 years after the assassination, is hearsay twice removed from the supposed source, and you feel it’s worthy of mention?
Yes I do because it's partially corroborated by someone who was at the autopsy.
Post by Hank Sienzant
You must not have anything better if you lead with that. And you think this story is credible enough to repeat here?
Yes I do because it's partially corroborated.
Post by Hank Sienzant
This is the problem inherent throughout the critical literature.
Critics ignore the hard evidence, discard the first hand eyewitness accounts, accept second- or third-hand hearsay, and ignore the actual experts and accept non-expert accounts from decades later.
Janie Taylor gave her testimony to the ARRB on 11/24/95. part of that testimony included the fact that people were asked to leave the autopsy room.
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=626
FBI agent Frank O'Neill revealed to the ARRB in Sept. 1997 that he, his partner Sibert, SS agents Kellerman and Greer and non-medical personnel were asked to leave the autopsy room by Drs. Humes and Boswell.
( O'Neill testimony to the ARRB 9/12/97, pg. 62; also see ARRB Medical Document 189, pg. 5 )
How did Janie Taylor and/or her sources know that people were asked to leave the autopsy room almost TWO YEARS before Frank O'Neill revealed it to the ARRB ?
Even a broken clock is right twice a day.
How is that even applicable here ? How could she have known people were asked to leave the autopsy room if someone who was there didn't tell her ?
Notice that Huckster simply refused to answer the question you asked.

He can't. And he can't refute it...

Huckster's simply a coward, and proves it in almost every post.
Post by Gil Jesus
Post by Hank Sienzant
What evidence have you uncovered of her brother’s name?
It wasn't HER brother, it as the orderly's brother who told her.
Of the supposed orderly/janitor’s name?
It's in the document at the link I posted above Hank. If you have to keep asking the same question over and over again, it's because you're not clicking on the link, ala Bud.
You have this story all fucked up. Did you even read the document ?
Or are you another gradutae of the John Corbett School of Reading Comprehension ?
Or more likely - in the "deny everything" camp of believers...

Ben Holmes
2023-12-05 16:16:25 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 4 Dec 2023 18:13:42 -0800 (PST), Hank Sienzant
<***@aol.com> wrote:

You've claimed that the "A.B.C.D." in the Autopsy Report is the
description of the *location* of the large head wound.

Yet you refuse time and time again from QUOTING the preceding
paragraph that describes what this ACTUALLY is. Why is that?

You've also claimed that the prosectors dissected the throat wound.

Why do you continue to refuse to cite any evidence for this?

Why have you CONSISTENTLY run away each time I raise this issue?

Now you've quite stupidly insisted that the bullet entered JFK's back,
and exited the back of his head.

More cowardice, more stupidity, more dishonesty.

Are you proud of yourself?
Hank Sienzant
2023-12-05 02:18:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ben Holmes
On Mon, 4 Dec 2023 05:31:04 -0800 (PST), JE Corbett
Post by JE Corbett
Do you deny that there was a flap of skull on the right side of JFK's head that
was blown open by the headshot?
Yes.
And no.
While it's cerrtainly possible that it existed in Parkland, it's also
quite reasonable to explain it as part of the pre-autopsy autopsy.
That would *also* explain why it wasn't seen at Parkland.
Ben says critics don't deal in speculation, then advances speculation.
Post by Ben Holmes
Note: Corbutt has offered *NO* reason why it wasn't seen at Parkland.
Post by JE Corbett
Do you agree that the blowout, or defect as the autopsy report described it,
extended from the back of the head (occipital) along the upper right side
of the head (parietal and temporal)?
Yes. What part of the occipital is *NOT* in the back of the head? And
why has EVERY SINGLE BELIEVER IN THIS FORUM refused repeatedly to
answer this question?
Post by JE Corbett
Do you have any explanation for why none of the Parkland ER team made any
mention of the blowout along the upper right side of the head?
Sure. Already given above. You, on the other hand, have refused to
offer an explanation.
Ben Holmes
2023-12-05 16:16:49 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 4 Dec 2023 18:18:44 -0800 (PST), Hank Sienzant
<***@aol.com> wrote:

You've claimed that the "A.B.C.D." in the Autopsy Report is the
description of the *location* of the large head wound.

Yet you refuse time and time again from QUOTING the preceding
paragraph that describes what this ACTUALLY is. Why is that?

You've also claimed that the prosectors dissected the throat wound.

Why do you continue to refuse to cite any evidence for this?

Why have you CONSISTENTLY run away each time I raise this issue?

Now you've quite stupidly insisted that the bullet entered JFK's back,
and exited the back of his head.

More cowardice, more stupidity, more dishonesty.

Are you proud of yourself?
Loading...