THE HOUSE SELECT COMMITTEE ON ASSASSINATIONS’ AUTOPSY PHOTOS
Much of the controversy surrounding the medical evidence might have been cleared up if the autopsy photos had been admitted into evidence. But the Warren Commission never examined them. The Commission’s failure to examine the autopsy photos concerning a homicide raised many eyebrows among the public.
Jim Garrison later tried to obtain the autopsy photos in order to help prove a conspiracy. However the Justice Department refused to hand them over.
In 1979 the House Select Committee on Assassinations decided to release the famous but not yet seen autopsy photos and have a panel of forensic pathologists examine the photos. However the Committee was hesitant to do so. Committee member Louis Stokes said, “The Committee feels it would be in extremely poor taste for this Committee to submit those photographs to public view.” Poor taste? This proves that the Committee was not taking a realistic look at the investigation. Instead they were more interested in a stage play for entertainment. In the real world taste is not a factor when it comes to a murder investigation.
The release of the autopsy photos and examination by the Forensic Pathology Panel should have cleared up a lot of questions. Instead it caused even more problems. As if the medical evidence was not confusing enough, the Forensic Pathology Panel by a vote of 8 to 1 concluded that Kennedy’s wounds were in locations which conflicted with the testimony of both the Parkland and Bethesda doctors. They concluded that one bullet struck the President 2 inches down his back and the exited his throat, and that a second bullet struck in on the top rear of the head. In order for this scenario to work, both the Parkland and Bethesda doctors would have to have perjured themselves.
How is it that the Panel could have reached such conclusions which contradicted all the previous medical evidence? The key problem could be that they based their conclusions solely on autopsy photos. But what if the autopsy photos were faked?
One of the best ways to authenticate the photos would be to ask autopsy photographer Lt. William Pitzer if these were the photos he took. This was never done due to the fact that Pitzer was shot in the head before he could testify.
Another good way to authenticate the photos would be to ask the Bethesda doctors if the photos depicted the wounds they saw. Dr. James Humes did tell the Committee that the photos depicted the wounds he observed. However this conflicts greatly with the story Humes told the Warren Commission. Humes told the Commission that Kennedy’s back wound was directly on the right side of the neck where it met the shoulder. Yet the photos show the wound two inches down his back. Humes also told the Commission that the rear head wound was at the base of the head. Yet the photos show the bullet wound at the top of the head. This is another example of Humes failing to keep his lies straight.
The easiest way to determine if the autopsy photos were faked would be to show the photos to the highly credible Parkland doctors and ask them if these were the wounds they observed. However this was never done by the House Select Committee on Assassinations.
The Doctors who examined Kennedy at Parkland Hospital told the Baltimore Sun after the autopsy photos were released with the House Select Committee Report that the photos were fake, because they did not match the wounds they saw.
Dr. Jackie Hunt said, “I can do a lot of funny things in this dark room too.”
Dr. Robert Shaw said, “If the body hadn’t been stolen away from us and had Dr. Rose performed a proper autopsy, there would be no question these fifteen years.”
Dr. Fouad Bashour said, “[The wounds] is not the way it was... Why do they cover it up?”
Doctors Marion Jenkins and Charles Baxter also said the photos were fake.
The idea that the photos were faked is a valid one. Although they do conflict with the Warren Commission’s claims, the wound on his back is still too high. Photos of his shirt show the hole 5 and 3/8 inches below his shoulders. Not two or three inches as the autopsy photos show. This is a big indescrepancy.
The photos of the back of the President’s head show the back of the head still intact. This conflicts with the testimony of eye witnesses who saw the back of the head blown out, and the testimony of the Parkland doctors who saw the back of the head blown out.
The photos of Kennedy’s face although graphic still conflict with the Zapruder film. The film shows that a good deal of the right side of his head was blown away. Yet the photos show most of his face still intact. There is a good possibility that the photos were faked.
One of the Committee’s own photographic experts Robert Groden also said the photos were fake. Groden said, “The direction of the entire House Assassinations Committee rested on one piece of evidence from the beginning-the autopsy photographs... when I did study them, I found at least two were phonies, which can be proved to any reasonable person.”
Groden later testified, “I had gone to the Chief Counsel of the House Committee which was Professor Blakey suggested, very strongly, perhaps it would be a good idea to show those questionable photographs to the Dallas doctors to determine their authenticity. For two solid years Professor Blakey refused to do it.
“When the Committee broke up and didn't exist anymore I was very disturbed by the fact that this had not been resolved, so I took copies of autopsy photographs and went to the Dallas doctors and other witnesses who dealt with the body, including Dealey Plaza witnesses, and I showed them the photographs, and every single one of them without exception said that the photographs were indeed fake, and I then knew that I was correct.”(OJ Simpson civil tiral 1-6-97)
Unfortunately the Committee’s other photo experts out voted Groden. He wrote in his dissenting opinion, “The fact that the HSCA panels have been unable to establish inauthenticity of these items may not reflect their authenticity but rather the skill with which they were forged.”
Groden later stated, “In 1964 the Warren Commission dealt with this evidence by not looking at it. It was made available to them. They felt if they looked at it they would have to deal with it and publish it, so they didn’t deal with it. In 1977, around that time frame the House Assassinations Committee had the photographs. What they did with it was even less excusable. They had the photographs, they had the questions that were brought to them about the photographs, and they did not allow the Dallas doctors—the most important witnesses in this particular area of the evidence— to even view them. And the reason seems quite clear. If they had the best eyewitnesses looking the photographs and saying it’s not the back of the president’s head, then you not only have a conspiracy to kill the president, but absolute proof of a conspiracy to cover it up after the fact. Because the only people who had the photographs were the government. If somebody faked those photographs it was someone in the government. So someone who had access to those photographs.”
Groden told assassination researcher Jim Marrs, “The key to understanding who killed Kennedy lies with the autopsy photographs. These photographs may tell us more about the assassination than all of the official investigations.”
Groden is right. Clearly anyone who compares the descriptions of the wounds with the photos can see that they are fake.
The House Select Committee on Assassinations’ third theory further confuses the medical evidence and shows a total lack of willingness to investigate.
THE HOUSE SELECT COMMITTEE ON ASSASSINATIONS’ AUTOPSY PHOTOS
Strokes:HSCA Vol.I p.180.
Humes:HSCA Vol.II p.347.
Parkland Doctors:Baltimore Sun, 7/30/79.
Groden:Fortworth Star Telegram, 5/16/70.
Groden’s opinion:HSCA Vol.VI p.299.
Groden to Marrs:Marrs p.535.
