In his recent 6th Floor Museum talk, scholar Max Holland invokes what he calls a “consensus” of “rational” people about the origins of the gunfire that hit President Kennedy. As this interview with Dr. Robert McClelland of Parkland Hospital shows, there is no such consensus.
9 thoughts on “Dr. Robert McClelland on the nature of JFK’s head wound”
I attended the Inaugural Ball for President Kennedy when I was 20 years old. His death by an assassin was devastating to me!
Dr. McClelland called himself Bob when I introduced myself at a presentation he did in 2013. During the questioning afterwards he pointed at me first. My question was “Dr. Perry stated twice on television the afternoon of 11/22 that JFK was shot from the front, he later changed his story for the Warren Commission. Do you think he changed his story as a result of pressure from others. His yes brought a gasp from the crowd.
it’s the “pressure from others” that seems to tell us(well, me anyway)that it wasn’t just LHO firing at JFK on 11-22-63…if LHO fired at him AT ALL.
Interesting, at 4:50 of the video Dr. McC points to the front right side of his neck and says that was where the neck wound from a bullet was, and that this was not the same place where the tracheostomy was later placed. But when you look at the Bethesda autopsy photos, there is no such off-center neck wound or incision… is he just misremembering 50 years on?
Yeah if he got that wrong maybe he got the head wound placement wrong
please. The autopsy photos show a large horizontal gash that certainly covers the area the doctor is pointing to.
JFK Murder Solved has an excellent web link on some of the witnessed to JFK’s head wound – the blowout hole in the back of his head: http://www.jfkmurdersolved.com/doctors.htm
Doug Horne has done some excellent investigation into that big hole in the back of JFK’s head. I suggest reading his books: http://spartacus-educational.com/JFKhomeD.htm
The problem of not the lack of consensus, the problem is that we have too many.
There are actually two “consensuses”. Or, to be precise, make that two and a half.
(a) Every single person who witnessed the injury and did not work for the military, or whose job was not at risk saw:
A large, gaping wound in the lower back of the head, toward the right.
That comprises an unanimity at Parkland of about 40 people. SS agent Clint Hill is included as well. Interestingly, the WC neglected to ask Mrs. Jacqueline.
According to a theory posited by Dr. Gerald Posner, when people are trying to save the life of a president, they become so agitated (regardless of decades treating those very kinds of injuries in trigger-happy Texas) that they see visions and injuries are ghostly rotated to the front of the head. Not sure of the journal name and whether his study was peer-reviewed. That rather unusual theory fails to explain the funerary personnel:
“You could feel the sharp edges of the bone at the edge of the hole in the back of the head”.
(b) Every single person who was under military authority saw the injury rotated, not by a little, but by about 180 degrees, in Bethesda.
(c) The 3rd. consensus is held by one individual: Dr. Pierre Finck (from the Army and therefore not under Bethesda authority) the only real pathologist who reticently assisted and later chose to escape to Switzerland, in order to avoid pesky reporters and book authors.
We can safely conclude that the good doctor voted with his feet.
Dr McClelland presents a very lucid description of events at Parkland which ought to diminish some of the misinformation about events and about what the surgeons witnessed.
The major driving force for the lack of consensus as to the origins of the gunfire undoubtedly stems from the many efforts by the Warren Commission, Secret Services, government and the Dallas Police Department to cover up evidence.
Many witness accounts speak of gunfire from different origins yet most of these were ignored, misrepresented, and or simply not followed up.
The major problem is the same problem that existed in 1963 – apart from evidence that has been lost to the world, so much evidence is the subject of institutional cover up.
The CIA is guilty of many serious crimes against humanity in the space of a handful of decades, the world over, but in this case the crime is one of utter disregard for the American people (the tax payers who fund this organisation of ill repute). Your CIA is also guilty of attempting to falsify history, and the truth behind JFK’s assassination.