s. dr. aguilar argued that based on eyewitnesses, autopsy photos and ask raise, this evidence was flawed. --s is a portion of this it is about one hour. -- >> i will be running through quite a few slides and i want to thank everybody and congratulate him for his devotion and he is one of the people when stimulated my interest and brought me sort of onboard after the debate and evidence the medical in 1990. we became acquainted. it was at that point i met smith who was walking into sit down and i want to start out with about --scussion here

it was originally reported in "the new york times," the warren commission report in 1964 that no material question remained on some -- unresolved. that is the conclusion reached and propagated by "new york the outset before anybody got a time to read the report in the 20's and volumes of supporting evidence. the new york times right from the get-go was supportive. it has become policy. alwaysthe things that is been the strong support for oswald was the fact that the scientific autopsy scientific evidence supported it to find in a book by visit who was interviewed and said all of it pointed to oswald's guilt.

when you look at the people we should trust on this. one of the things -- what the things you will know from people who has followed the case a long time is that there are people who are considered really the authorities. these are people detached, objective, experience, professional, scientifically trained and so forth. what are they? photograph,, in old i cannot find a better one. finck.well and there autopsy showed to the shots to the right. alfred oliv is a dr. of veterinary medicineier and he testified for the rockefeller commission and did work for the

warren commission and testified for the warren commission. you have dr. russell fisher, a colleague of dr. west, a medical examiner of baltimore. of dick clarkn panel -- he was a chairman of the clark camp. you have luis alvarez. -- and he debunked the acoustics. on the right, one person whenever the anniversary comes around, automatically the first to a former coroner. addition, we have the association. george came over to a series of articles at the aftermath in

1991 and 1982, a series of articles in the journal of american medical association is that his right from the journal. we are able to have -- and that's a picture standing with dr. lundberg, not a good one. the journal was also all of the ama journals, quite a powerful endorsement and the new york times chimed in that by organizing and publishing the key findings of the warmer

commission, the articles performed a service for reasonable people and for a reason. and to all who are willing to listen our proof of its territory a -- against paranoia. authorities in the country leading medical experts and pathologists and authorities. wild -- alsoalso guilt. oswald's scientific evidence and test shots in the skulls. was said tovidence prove the magic bullet and all the recovered fragments traced oswald's ts from rilfe. in scientific duplication of

test shots. by the nobeled laureate and physicists. let's go through these, the autopsies. have -- and here they are. he is in the middle. here is his assistant. they started the autopsy half an hour later. i will make only one comment about this. finck and dr. morton who is the dean was reported and you can

fincit in the book that had beenk revealing and not done a hands on autopsy. these were not practicing pathologist. nevertheless, the autopsy report 387, three shots were heard in the president fell forward. it was not uncommon for autopsy reports to include information relevant to the circumstances of the event, the assassination and so, there it is. two shots are heard. then was supplemented with these

diagrams which were produced as we heard earlier for testimony by the autopsy pathologist and the report said there was a large, irregular defect -- there you can see that it is the diagram as was prepared by the autopsy doctors and working with and they drew these diagrams sure what can you do looked like at the time he was assassinated. -- and these diagrams showing what kennedy looked like at the time he was assassinated. but thisinted this out were prepared for the warren report on the left. defectgram, producing a

of 13 sonograms. autopsy,ght of the there was an autopsy diagram from the shoot that dr. boswell drew a you can see right here is says 17. i was showed several times to get a larger view. you can make it out. under oath, and reportedly had a conversation i had with dr. boswell that i only record because i know the warren commission center would say i was lying -- [laughter] they always do. he told me the same thing. he said it would be fair to say when he first examined the body, the school was missing from those dimensions -- scroll -- skull was missing from those dimensions. they first examined him. the defect was not 13 sonograms, it was 17. that's what they wrote on ink.

it is not something done later on. the wound was much larger than reported. he said, yes. i will get into what it means. to someonespeaking who knows the material better than i do, getting everybody up to speed on a somewhat complicated issue. if i am talking down to people, i apologize. if i'm speaking of two people, i apologize. the diagram. the autopsy doctors were criticized for having the correct site is safety and shoot went along in the bottom of the head. the clark camp and other people who reviewed later on saturday missed the finishing -- in shoot . basically, said to have met with the en- missed where

was that. is where theirmarkings were. this is the correct entrance wo i missedined -- where the entrance one boswell was interviewed him here's a diagram he prepared. what he found wafers examined the body this the outline. ruler,take a centimeter centimeters it puts you about here. that that the training that they have that they have and they know how to use the mreters was sono

there in the defect had to go in the back of the head. perhaps they were so incompetent that do not have to do a autopsy, they do not know how to do a ruler. here are the autopsy reports. an other evidence for veling. is there was be a is when you shoot a bb at can and improves the direction of the bullet. it says -- as they are talking about the autopsy report, they look they insiders say there is beveling and that means the bullet came forward. -- others of the skull

old metalments -- -- fragment -- that show metal fragments. is the case from a forensic standpoint. the conclusion was kennedy died from 2 gunshots -- here is the internal bebveling. that is where the trail of fragments was at this dish with was.human s -- that is where the trail of

fragments was. human --t to show a and this is to show a human s kennedy's. he commission the panel, the ramsey panel, clark panel rather if a look at this and they determine the autopsy was wrong about the federal bullet that struck jfk's head. again,her, whole absolutely well respected authority and pathologists for decades was the chief coroner in fragments, a lot of bullet fragments, if you

extend, passes through the above-mentioned higher entrance hole. fistfuls be a trail of fragments -- there is supposed to be a trail of fragments. that is wrong because the trail goes from the higher locatin. who a very strong defender of the warren commission, also looked at the x-rays. he said and reported that if ,ou look at the fragment trail where was up here.

he was saying that the trail friday goes from here it extends forward. here's where the forensic pathologist label to be the skull.led john latimer said it was. again, there is lots of criticisms about this. -- original autopsy team they came with a whole list, nobody whether going into detail here. the internal beveling showed she was not shot to there. we have been through this already. let's take a look at the royal evidence itself and i want to this audience to realize you are more experts and some of you are

trained physicians, radiologists , forensic pathologist. you are more expressed that everyone i have talked about. here is where the original autopsy doctors said the fragments were and what the colleges -- pathologists. this is where it would be. originals. the that is the clark panel said it was. can you see where the real trail is? here is where they said it was. that is where it is. it does not show up so well here. i have seen them. ultimately, the house assassination had one radiologist who talked about the trail think at least five

centimeters higher as the entrance site. all of us have missed it by a whopping margin. these are trained. would approve the shot came from behind because it was beveling -- we could prove the shots came from behind because it was beveling. there was also the new york decidingming in and that was a boring in the rear of the neck that had proved a bullet had gone in for behind. let's get into the business of beveling. beveling, as we pointed out here, occurs when the bullet goes through like a bb per a glass. this -- butell at to win a boswell and this in my report, boswell told me -- but

when boswell edits is my room --ards, boswell talk they had to what he is saying is this suggests that there were an intact plate of bone that he took out of the brain that looked inside and inside was a beveled wound. that was not what it was at all. what didthere was -- there was was an edge of a bomb

and another fragment wrote in. -- what there was was an edge of fragment. another owns supported by his autopsy sheet and it could go back to the level -- or you do not have enough skull if you look at the bottom. , this is small little diagram of something, this bone was all gone. small piece fit this is the autopsy sheet. the absence of bone is what the diagram showed.

-- nail an application biter had ever asked that when i was working and i was preparing cover some the questions he did with the people, it did not occur to me to ask if it was meant to be the diagram of that fragment which fit in down there. it is supposedly showing the beveling. far from being an absolute certainties, this evidence is sketchy. you have to assume that they were able to see it. far from totally convinced. again, we go back to the autopsy report. he goes forward in bleeding from the head and that is not what happened at all. depressed to do not fall forward. he fell backwards. -- the president did not fall forward. on a hand written autopsy report which is available, it is says

the process go forward into the car. -- the president felt forward in the car. he was hit in the head and he fell forward and they had to figure out how it all fits. they were not particularly competent ecologist -- pathologists. the test shot of the human skull. , the new york times reporting on it and said when the bullets hit the skull from the bottom at one close to the entrance point. the new york times has always been extremely subservient to the official version that they put that down. they were not wrong about saying

that is what had been testified and here he is. this a copy directly and he said -- i am sorry at cut it off. this right from the warming report. -- warming report. report.n the irony is they had the diagram. andwarren commissioners these are the photographs he showed to the warren commission. here is the test school he shot. skull abrams and the image is a it is -- he kull and test s

brings in and the images are printed. there's a huge disparity between that non-interesting -- and no injuries at what happened with the test skull. there is autopsy photograph. as many of you know. warr report alsoen reported -- warm and report -- --ren report also notice that they did this to show you the path of the bullet. he was one huge difference. -- you will notice one huge difference. down in the diagram but

to point is having shot, had kennedy been shot in the way they said it was there the you can seee skull, that bullet would have blown out to his face just as it did in the test skull. in order to avoid that by having his head downward, they can depict this and report they had acted the same position. of bulletve analysis evidence. this is long been held that's been a very powerful thing. l hoch writing many years ago a critics like him and people like bob lady in others atkely and others were smitten by the evidence when it was first presented. that --orts

here we have the assassination. his testimony is fairly early in the examination of the kennedy case and he took the wind out of the sails of a lot of people who were critics when this was reported that the activation analysis proved that all bullets bullets from firearms match to oswald. here he is testifying. he is saying there is no evidence. there's clear evidence for 2. .ere is dr. blakey

blakey says and there's a transcript of global online -- latimer quotes -- for the have into gaza , thise you have in 2004 means experts have reviewed it. ron.n

this is taken from that. ited -- copiede and pasted it. scientific publ improved -- it proved that oswald acted alone. to take ao bothered look at his paper would notice an interesting thing. published into gaza for if you look at the footnotes of which there are only -- published in at the footnotes of which there is only 15. citation in his 1979.was published in

there's a lot of stuff published over the years. i had always been very skeptical about this and that heard about a guy, he had testified in a court case against jason gwynne when somebody had been charged in a murder case at published in "the los angeles times," at this guy had been confronted at gwen for the prosecution in a murder case using activation analysis. she was testified against and the guy was acquitted. i said, this is interesting. , holes atp rick berkeley. berkeley and i try to pique his interest. heand his associate, pat, had been gwen's graduate

student. the do not care dollar if kennedy was killed by also walled and have -- also walled oswald and have no opinion. iey finally published and want to get them here to years ago to talk about this. ultimately, they concluded the bullet evidence from the assassination was were , medicalt from medical and surgical statistical standpoint. and their conclusion was, the inclusion of material evidence for only two bullets in the kennedy assassination and a forensic basis.

>>. shortly after that, the next year, they published another article. they took apart the statistical analysis as well as the metallurgical conclusions. the neutron activation analysis has been to bonked. i'm not going to reap this for you. those that have an interest, i can get you the citation. it is relatively available. again, the fact remains they took a stab at some of these tests. worn commission

reconstruction did not. the house select committee on assassination performed the trajectory analysis. he proved the wounds were aligned by a single bullet originating at a stivers -- snipers nest. for those who really want to reed in depth about trajectory and the problems which are directory analysis, i would refer you to don,'s book, fear no evil. i will touch on these to show you that this is an example of junk science. had the origin of the headshot 29 degrees to the right of true north. that is from his report.

none of the measurements reported anywhere in the analysis were ever given reference to true north or what it means. there is no objective way of testing his work. that is also true of the back wounds. canning calculated the headshot trajectory and this is a diagram from his own report and where's the president sitting? in the middle of the limousine, not to the right of where he actually was. it is an example of someone trying to prove a bias. i will continue on with that in just a minute. none of the wound locations are the same as the locations in the pathology report. he chose his own wonder locations. it's incredible. he assumed that the bullets

deflection was passing through jfk's body was negligible. this is right from the forensic panel. the are concerned as to degree of accuracy based on a backward extension within the the, particularly within degrees required. why is that? when a bullet strikes, it causes to cavity within the tissues. it will be deflected by the bone if it hits the bone. showsome of the studies that soft tissues can deflect the bone. dale myers came up with a trajectory analysis that was reported on the abc. these are diagrams from his work. he proved that that should gentry prove that the shop came from the schoolbook depository,

but his analysis is on the bullet at 224. it does not matter if it's 190 or 224, when the president is in a decidedly different position, the trajectory announced will still get you to that sell these corner window. ok? if he is in here are not. i took this from pat spears at work. it is worth reading his work on this. i think he has done a nice job of that's. -- of this. myers has done is move the back wound up a little bit. it appears as if the neck wound is at a higher location than the back wound. he has kennedy slumped forward slightly. that's how they determine that there was this upward track.

he had always wanted to explain how this occurred, michael badin. at the time of the fatal shot, kennedy was leaning forward. the bullet can track upwards because your leaning further for than the downslope. demonstratingl that in a tv show. convinced that the nonfatal shot hit him at 224. here is those a prude or frame 225. he is not leaning forward. now we have a scientific test laureate thatel showed that it is most probable that the shot came from behind the car, driving jfk back.

these are the frames that show it. 312 -- 321. kennedy is rocked backwards. lewis our perez said the jet effect could explain that. solve thereportedly problem to my own satisfaction and an one-dimensional fashion down the back of an envelope. [laughter] jet effect recoil explains it. sympathetic for conspiracy and then turned , he said no and would believe it unless we could demonstrate a retrograde recoil. here is his experiment. a bullet coming from the right.

-- from the left. you see the bullet comes from the left. .t blows out here the skull moves back off the table. i have a better slide of it. here we are. here's the bullet coming from the left, going across here, you see the big spray of debris. that melon that he shoots falls back to proof positive of the jet effect. this is supposed to advocate what we see in the film. you have how fred olivier testifying before the rock amount -- rockefeller commission , the jet effect is demonstrated by lewis offer as when you shoot jet of, when you get a honeydew melon going out the front, the melon would roll towards a gun, showing that there was some movement from this jet effect.

in 1975, before our perez published his paper. that is interesting. do it. luis alvarez he supercharged his ammunition and rather than use a counter a 36 huntingd round. is not a jacketed bullet. i jacketed bullet will have little of fact. as other people have shown. he did use a different bullet and got some recoil. he shot it melons, not a human skull. this is in the american journal of physics article in 1976, by the way 1976 is when he published that article -- in 1975 is when he testified. a had been in contact.

in peer-reviewed scientific literature, it is important to stress the fact that a taped melon was our a priori best mockup of a head, and it showed retrograde recoil in the first test. if we had use the edison test, and shot at a large collection of objects, and finally found one which gave retrograde recoil, then our frying experiments could reasonably be criticized. suitably understated. , ahin the last two years good friend asked if he had a copy of the photographs. so he pulled the photographs out of his own file all the photographs they had taken during alvarez's shooting experiment. had showed that alvarez ,hot a coconuts, pineapples

plastic jugs full of water, etc. , all targets were driven down range, except the melons. a physician who is sitting in i havem here and repeatedly said that this sounds bullshit to me. he said, would you calling a nobel laureate a liar? [laughter] paul did. when yourt happens mind changes. >> would you allow me to interrupt.

i have been asked to announce that dr. proctor is giving a presentation on the fingerprints of intelligence and that we are reshuffling things a bit during the course of the afternoon in consideration of new presentations. pleas proceed. i am sorry for the interruption. targets were driven down range except melons. this is a photograph from his shooting test. the bullet came from the right, came through here, it moves it away. he wrote that, whether taped or not, a bullet will cut to the outside of a melon like butter. a human skull is completely different. the thick scope on requires considerable force to be penetrated and that forces deposited in the skull as momentum.

now we finally get to the new muscular reaction issue. most ofthat he thought the movement you see in the president moving backwards is due to a neuromuscular reaction. myths, hek, jfk explained the new rear muscular reaction. he shows this picture that he calls fallen soldier and was spanish civilhe war. thank you. great having and knowledgeable historian in the room. thank you. is notknow david, this taken them. this photograph was not taken then. did you know that? >> i knew it. >> you knew it. ok. it was taken 50 miles from where this is supposed to have been taken pretty was not shot in the head. story case, it's a long about this having been debunked.

you should someone in the head, that they would go backwards. he also, this is testimony he gave before the house committee assassinations, he showed these images of a goat being shot in the head. i should quote is testimony. i will not do it for time reasons. he talks about what you actually see here. the four legs and backplanes all went outwards. they splay outwards when you get a goat in the head with a bullet. that's not would you see in the kennedy case treat what you see is the head wound and then the body follows. you can do this as many times as you want. it is decidedly different than a new muscular reaction. there is much more to be said about newer muscular reaction. suffice to say there is better -- for a listen -- little reason

to save it nor muscular reaction accounts for his movement backwards. it is fairly clear that they do not really give you the kind of convincing evidence. you had test shots on skulls, entirely misrepresentative. have the neutron activation reality which has been bumped. effect, have the jet and those tests were reported and done dishonestly. so, with the other thing that is that thising about is is supposed to approve that this is where the bullets came from, from behind. discoloration on the edge of the back wound. as being the it entrance one for a bullet.

report in 1960e a. this is dr. lindenberg sang -- confirming the findings of a clark panel that there was a dark discoloration of the margin .f the skin this shows that if you hit the skin with a bullet perpendicularly, you get a circular win like this with a zone of discoloration. if it comes from above, you get an abrasion color from above. right? i want to assure that you are all better authorities than the rest of the commission experts. here is a tie graham -- diagram that shows what we see. where is the abrasion color. it is here. it is down below. this is it just my own view of this. the house select committee on

assassinations concluded the same thing. here is another authority. those of who have seen him on specials 11 years ago in a debate, i lay this out for him and told him he was completely wrong. yet, to a three years ago he was on tv saying the same thing. the autopsy photographer was there. trying toan -- explain why the autopsy photographs were so bad. the corner who normally takes a photographs was confronted by an spi agent in the morgue who said you don't have clearance and took them off the job and why they're so lousy. we have our own man taking pictures. this is what he wrote. pointed out to me that

he had written this, but he had been saying this to her three years after the house select committee on assassinations report came out. the fbi took the autopsy photographs. that is why the photographs are so lousy. select the house committee's report. this is the panel's report. they took the photographs under the direction of dr. humes. stringer also stated that the federal agent took a camera from him and expose the film. this apparently occurred because the agent felt stringer was he only person authorized photograph the body. in the house select committee his report, it proves nonsense, which he continues to repeat today.

i sent him a copy of the page of his book, my side, and said i will be happy to buy you dinner if you can see there is any misrepresentation here. for those of you who don't know the case, many of you do, know that your was a huge disk connect between what the doctor's set up about jfk's ones on the out they are of two photographs. here is a diagram of dr. mcclellan. here's dr. paul peters writing , saying thatngston is about where i saw the wound, too. , people stack it all up say i try to misquote them, but all ofn never prove it, these people at parkland hospital said there was a room -- wound in the right part of

jfk's head. they were concerned about this. i've put this out in a conference about 15 years ago when i first discovered this. the findings found on the observations recorded by the parkland hospital doctors. in disagreement with the observation of the parkland doctors are the 26 people present at the autopsy. all of those interviewed who attended the autopsy corroborated the general location of the wounds as depicted in the photographs. none had differing accounts. it appears more probable that the observations of the parkland doctors are incorrect. was not then known, because it was suppressed into the review board came along, is what witnesses in the autopsy had actually told the group. here are some diagrams from people interviewed by the group. the federal witnesses

interviewed by a just ca not only describe loans, they depicted them in diagrams that were suppressed. all of those interviewed, incorporated that the wound is in front of the year. that the wound is in front of the ear. all of the interviews with the parkland doctors are wrong. i'm going to give your couple. i could give you 10 of them. they say versus same thing. again, suppressed. said that then wounds were directly behind the back of his head. the commanding officer of the military district of washington's at the skull wound was in the back of the head. this is the mortician who prepared him for burial.

you can basically see that most of these people place the wound on the back of the head. we need to understand how did this happen. i'm sure there are several people in this room who have done peer-reviewed's in their specialty. i have done peer-reviewed's in ophthalmology. seen that you have to make all sorts of suggestions and corrections to get it right. tendency for confirmation bias that goes on. much to my amazement, i ran across his article many years ago. the maryland medical state journal interview, the doctor reported that ramsey clark called him. he became concerned about the statements he had seen from josiah thompson. he decided to get a panel of

people together to look at the autopsy evidence. that thegoal was report was released to refute some of the junk in that book. , russellark gave him fisher, his marching orders are not that he was a corrupt thereal, but he went out with the knowledge that there were people undermining the faith of the government. he believed that he had to do something about this. so, that is one indication of how this starts. it turns out that russell fisher and the clock panel people also happen to have friends in." lee's who work for the rockefeller commission -- have colleagues whose work for the rockefeller commission.

finally, somebody finally puts it where it is. there is always a tendency to just look carelessly at work. these are good honest people. you don't look. carefully. you try to put things together that makes sense to justify the work of your prior colleagues. there is an article, which i published why most research findings are false. that is because of confirmation bias. whenrmation bias occurs people search for information that confirms their hypotheses while ignoring mitigating evidence. it is a type of cognitive bias. a pattern of deviation and judgment that occurs in particular situations, leading

to a perceptual distortion, and accurate judgment, or illogical interpretation. this happens all the time in my specialty. i see it all the time and papers i have reviewed. again, according to available information, three shots were heard in the president fell forward bleeding from the head. they were told he was shot from above, and behind. give us the evidence that will prove it. these weren't dishonest mantra they were not lying. they were trying to put together something that they knew had to fit. here's jack kennedy. that is what he looked like. everybody was to see those photographs. these people are not liars. they are not corrupt. they're not part of some anti-american conspiracy. they're not here to deceive people. thatpursue things in ways they think to confirm the

biases. -- everything fits with also does a killer. whenever he talks on the subject, he always shapes that evidence. he continues to shape it in the same way. junkis why there has been science in the kennedy case. it is everywhere pervasive. thank you very much. [applause] >> you are watching american history tv. 48 hours of american history programming each weekend on c-span3. to keep upc-span.org with the