jfk_medical - Elm Street Echos: The JFK Mystery

Wounds, X-Rays and Forensics

A reexamination of the medical evidence.

The official account of John F. Kennedy’s death, per the 1964 Warren Commission, relies heavily on medical evidence from the autopsy performed at Bethesda Naval Hospital. It concluded that two bullets, fired by Lee Harvey Oswald from behind, struck JFK: one exiting through his throat (the “single bullet theory”) and another causing the fatal head wound. The autopsy photos, X-rays, and testimony from doctors like James Humes and Thornton Boswell underpinned this lone-gunman narrative.

But reexaminations—starting with the 1970s House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) and fueled by later declassifications and independent probes—have poked holes in that story. The HSCA, in 1978, largely backed the Warren findings but introduced a twist: acoustic evidence suggested a possible second shooter from the grassy knoll, though the medical data still pointed to shots from behind. Their panel of forensic experts reviewed the autopsy materials and confirmed a rear-entry head wound, but critics latched onto discrepancies.

Key issues emerged. The autopsy itself was rushed—done by military pathologists with limited forensic experience, under tight control. Witnesses, like Parkland Hospital doctors in Dallas who first treated JFK, described a large exit wound in the back of his head, clashing with Bethesda’s smaller rear-entry wound. This sparked theories of a frontal shot. The brain, a critical piece of evidence, was poorly documented—its weight was recorded as normal (1,500 grams), implausible for a shot-up brain, and photos of it are missing or disputed.

The single bullet theory—where one bullet supposedly hit JFK and Governor Connally—got scrutiny too. The bullet (CE 399) was nearly pristine, raising doubts about its ability to cause seven wounds. Ballistics experts, like Dr. Cyril Wecht, argued it defies physics, while 1990s computer models (e.g., Failure Analysis Associates) supported its feasibility if aligned just right. Still, Connally’s own testimony about the timing of his wounds fueled skepticism.

Later reexaminations—like the 1992 JAMA articles defending the autopsy—tried to shore up the official line, but the 1998 Assassination Records Review Board (ARRB) uncovered more cracks. Depositions from autopsy witnesses, like photographer John Stringer, suggested missing photos or tampering. X-ray analysis by Dr. David Mantik claimed evidence of a frontal shot, with signs of altered films. The Zapruder film, showing JFK’s head snapping back, kept the “shot from the front” theory alive, though experts debate whether it’s momentum or a neuromuscular reaction.

Today, the medical evidence splits opinions. Mainstream forensic reviews (e.g., 2005 National Academy of Sciences study) lean toward the Warren conclusions, citing bullet trajectories and X-ray consistency. Critics—researchers like Dr. Gary Aguilar—point to sloppy procedures, missing data (like the brain, lost to history), and conflicting witness accounts, suggesting a cover-up or at least incompetence. No consensus exists, but the reexaminations have turned the autopsy into a battleground: solid proof for some, a house of cards for others.