Gary Aguilar does a point by point, detailed, and illustrated rebuttal to Robert Wagner’s defense of Gary’s criticisms of his book.
Gary Aguilar Rebuts Robert Wagner
By Gary L. Aguilar, MD
Self-described “open-minded” Bob Wagner’s riposte (click here) to my review of his book is a showcase of how closed the minds of Warren Commission loyalists are to evidence that threatens J. Edgar Hoover’s no conspiracy verdict. The imperious and notoriously corrupt Bureau Chief, who instilled fear in all, including the Warren Commissioners and LBJ,[1] pronounced Oswald the sole assassin within hours of the ex-marine’s arrest. [2] He controlled the investigation, pressing his remarkable epiphany on the public[3] as well as on the hapless Warren Commissioners whom he cowed. (“[N]ot one of its seven members had any investigative experience.”[4]) The Commissioners bent the knee, as the Church Committee and the House Select Committee later determined.[5] With good reason.
Hoover had them file-checked them for “derogatory information.” Commissioner Gerald Ford spied for Hoover and helped him block Earl Warren’s preferred choice for Chief Counsel, Warren Olney.[6] The lawyer Hoover preferred, Chief Counsel J. Lee Rankin, later admitted: “Who could protest against what Mr. Hoover did back in those days?” It’s pretty clear that at the time, no one could, not the U. S. Chief Justice nor Congressmen and Senators. Assistant FBI Director William Sullivan understood how things worked: “Only if one unwritten but iron rule was unfailingly observed: The Director was always right.”[7] Predictably, the Warren Commission proved Sullivan was right.
Bob Wagner shows that, even in these days, some remain who seem unmoved by the government’s myriad, proven lies and bad faith, and I stand with Hoover’s pre-investigation epiphany. In doing so, Wagner repeatedly violates Occam’s principle that the simplest explanation – in this case, the one that requires the fewest assumptions, the fewest exceptions to the rule, the fewest leaps of faith – is most likely the correct one. Wagner shows his hostility to Lord Occam in his take on “clearly the central theme,” and the “primary point of his analysis”: the location of Kennedy’s skull wound. (Wagner’s emphasis)
Wagner relentlessly campaigns to discredit Parkland Hospital’s Dr. Robert McClelland’s sworn testimony: “[The] right posterior portion of [JFK’s] skull had been extremely blasted.”[8] His description matched those of other Parkland doctors. Wagner argued, “if Dr. McClelland, having several minutes to observe the wound, could get this wrong, why wouldn’t others do the same?”[9] (He dodged a question I’d put to him: How did the two neurosurgery professors who lifted JFK’s skull and examined the head wound also get it wrong, describing it much as McClelland and the others had?)
KENNEDY’S HEAD WOUND – WERE THE DALLAS DOCTORS WRONG?
“The large wound was on the top of the head,” Wagner insists. So, the doctors were wrong. Wagner’s proof? “Alternate substantive evidence.” (Sounds almost Trumpian.) His alternative evidence is threefold.
One: The autopsy said Kennedy’s head wound was “chiefly the parietal bone but extending somewhat into the temporal and occipital regions.”[10]
Two: A 4 x 2.5-inch skull fragment was ejected from the top of JFK’s skull and found in the limousine – the so-called “triangular” or “Delta” fragment.
Three: An autopsy photo shows what Wagner says is a bullet hole in the low, occipital bone, with missing bone above it at the top of JFK’s skull.
The Texas crew missed the damage to the top of JFK’s head. And I blew it because I never “addressed how head wound witnesses at Parkland (and Bethesda) (sic) failed to note this large area of skull missing from the top of the president’s (sic) head.” He’s wrong.
First, there’s much more about Kennedy’s head wound than Wagner’s quotes from the autopsy report. Moreover, I have discussed the obvious and common-sensical reason that both Parkland and Bethesda witnesses didn’t notice that a bone was missing from the top of JFK’s skull. He ignored it.
J. Thornton Boswell’s much-discussed “face sheet” diagram of JFK’s skull, prepared during the autopsy, is primary evidence. It’s superior to the official autopsy report that was written, rewritten, and typed up later, and which says that Kennedy’s skull defect measured “13 cm. in greatest diameter.”[11] The House Select Committee’s (HSCA) Dr. Michael Baden asked Boswell about an important discrepancy in this diagram:
Baden: “Could you explain the diagram on the back [of Boswell’s face sheet]?”
Boswell: “Well, this was an attempt to illustrate the magnitude of the [skull] wound again. And as you can see it’s 10 centimeters from right to left, 17 centimeters from posterior to anterior.”[12] (Fig. 1)
Figure 1. Dr. Boswell’s “face sheet” diagram of JFK’s skull. In the center of the image, Boswell wrote “17” and “missing,” with an arrow pointing front-to-back. He also wrote “10” next to an arrow pointing right-to-left. The official autopsy report says Kennedy’s skull defect measured “13 cm. in greatest diameter.”
How did a 17-cm skull defect on the night of the autopsy shrink in the autopsy report? Boswell told the HSCA, the Assassinations Records Review Board (ARRB), and me that JFK’s skull defect measured 17 cm at the outset of the autopsy. But after a late-arriving bone fragment was replaced into the bottom rear of JFK’s skull, into the “occiput,” the remaining gap then measured “only” 13 cm, the dimension specified in the autopsy report.[13]
Two important things follow. Not only was bone ejected from the top of JFK’s skull, the Delta fragment, but bone was also ejected from the rear, from the low, occipital bone. (Fig. 2)
Figure 2. Diagram of human skull viewed from the right side.
Secondly, JFK’s skull defect ran per force from the low, occipital bone in the skull’s rear to roughly the parietal-frontal bone region in the front. That’s what Boswell depicted on a human skull that he had marked for the ARRB. Both Boswell’s face sheet and ARRB diagrams are in sharp contrast to what the Warren Commission presented to the public, the Rydberg diagram. It depicts a small (bullet) hole in the rear of JFK’s skull in an otherwise intact plate of bone, and a skull defect that is well above that hole. (Fig. 3)
Figure 3. Left: Photo of a skull marked by Dr. Boswell depicting the size of JFK’s skull defect at autopsy.[14] Notice that the defect extends deeply into the bottom of “JFK’s” low occipital bone. Center: a two-dimensional rendering of the markings Boswell made on the human skull for the ARRB. It shows the shape and dimension of Kennedy’s skull defect at autopsy.[15]
Right: Warren Commission Exhibit 386 shows a small occipital entrance wound, which is distinct from the large right-sided skull defect. Boswell told the HSCA in 1977 and the ARRB in 1996 that the entrance hole was not in an intact plate of bone. They actually inferred it was a wound of entrance from the beveling present on a late-arriving bone fragment, which fit into a wound that was initially much larger than shown here, and which extended down to the entrance hole. (See CE # 386.[16] Also see Boswell’s HSCA interview,[17] and Dr. Boswell’s ARRB deposition, p. 79 ff.[18])
The reason Parkland’s trauma surgeons, neurosurgery professors, and autopsy witnesses said JFK’s skull wound was occipital has an obvious, simple explanation. Wagner says I never addressed this. I have, several times, starting decades ago.
“Wounds picked apart during an autopsy examination,” I wrote 25 years ago, “are often found to be larger than they first appeared to emergency personnel. In Kennedy’s case, moreover, Jackie Kennedy testified that she tried to hold the top of JFK’s head down as they raced from Dealey Plaza to Parkland Hospital. It is not hard to imagine that during the time it took the Presidential limousine to get to Parkland Hospital, a clot had formed, gluing the top portion of JFK’s disrupted scalp down, making JFK’s skull defect appear smaller to treating surgeons than it later would to autopsy surgeons.”[19]
Jackie has said as much herself. ” ’He had his hand out, I could see a piece of his skull coming off, and I can see this perfectly clean piece detaching itself from his head . . . I kept holding the top of his head down, trying to keep the brains in,’ she said on Nov. 29, 1963.[20]” (my emphasis)
In his rebuttal, Wagner offers autopsy witness FBI agent James Sibert in support of his claim that the overlooked Delta fragment proves the Dallas error. But in a taped interview, Sibert described what he saw when Kennedy’s head was unwrapped at autopsy: “… there was a sheet unwrapped off the head. There was a big gaping hole in the right rear of the head back here … .”[21] (my emphasis) (Fig. 4) Sibert also diagrammed the wound he saw for the ARRB. Sibert thus confirms that JFK’s head wound at autopsy looked eerily like, if not as large as, the wound Dr. McClelland saw at Parkland.[22] Many other autopsy witnesses described it in similar terms, and so were just as “mistaken” as Dallas neurosurgeons and the FBI Agent were.[23]
Figure 4. Left: screenshot of witness James Sibert showing where JFK’s wound was when they unwrapped his head at autopsy. Center: MD 188 – Sketch made by FBI agent James W. Sibert for the ARRB – Anatomical Drawing of Wound in President Kennedy’s Head (Executed on September 11, 1997). Right: “McClelland diagram” attested to by Dr. McClelland in 1998.
Jackie held the top of JFK’s head down on the way to Parkland; a blood clot kept his scalp down; and the full extent of his skull defect wasn’t apparent until the surgeons at Bethesda lifted his scalp to examine his huge skull defect. My reply to Wagner’s claim of: “The large wound was on the top of the head, not lower on the back of the head” is clear. Kennedy’s wound was so large that it involved both the top of his head as well as the back of his head.
But what about the autopsy photograph that shows the backside of JFK’s head intact and undamaged? Does this not prove Dr. McClelland, neurosurgeon Dr. Kemp Clark, Agent Sibert, etc., were wrong? (Fig. 5) The ARRB asked Boswell about this very photograph.
Q. Okay. Could we turn to the sixth view, which is described as “wound of entrance in right posterior occipital region”? That corresponds to black and white photos Nos. 15 and 16, and color photos Nos. 42 and 43. Do these photographs appear to you, Dr. Boswell, to be accurate representations of photographs taken during the autopsy of President Kennedy?
A. Yes.
Q. In that photograph, is the scalp of President Kennedy being pulled forward?
A. Yes.
Q. For what purpose was it being pulled forward?
A. In order to take the photograph, because if it wasn’t pulled forward, this would just–the scalp would come down and cover the wound of entrance here. And this was necessary to demonstrate the wound here. [24]
In other words, the photo of the back of JFK’s head doesn’t show the rearward extent of the head wound because JFK was lying on his left side, not upright, as his scalp was pulled forward over the back of his skull to show a bullet wound in the scalp. (Fig.5)
Figure 5. Left: Autopsy photo as it’s usually displayed. Kennedy is upright; the backside of JFK’s head is intact and undamaged. Center: diagram of the wound that Parkland’s Dr. Robert McClelland said he saw. Right: proper orientation of the photo as it was taken. JFK is lying on his left side, and an autopsist (Boswell?) is holding JFK’s rearward scalp forward over the right-rear portion of Kennedy’s skull wound.
WAGNER’S CLAIM: AN AUTOPSY PHOTO PROVES OCCIPITAL INSHOOT
Re Wagner’s last bit of ‘alternate evidence,’ an autopsy photo commonly called the ”mystery photo”. It is so badly shot and composed that many could not understand what it was. I do not accept his “special plea” that he knows what it is and what it means, when even the autopsy surgeons and the HSCA’s Forensic Pathology Panel were uncertain about its proper orientation or meaning. Besides, as I originally wrote, Dr. Pierre Finck, who held JFK’s skull in his hands, as Wagner put it, said that this is not the photo Wagner says it is.
This “mystery photo” (sic) is of the “occipital wound of entrance,” he says, “How could it be otherwise?” It’s otherwise for at least two good reasons. First, in his 1965 memo to General Blumberg, Finck wrote that “I found a through-and-through wound of the occipital bone, with a crater visible from the inside. This wound showed no crater when viewed from the outside.”[25] (my emphasis)
The wound in the photo, as I discussed in my original review, and as anyone can see, is beveling. But it’s beveled outside, not inside, and it’s plainly visible, even in this bootleg “mystery photograph.” (Fig. 6) The outside beveling makes this photo more likely one of an outshoot, not Wagner’s occipital inshoot.
Figure 6. “Mystery photo” from JFK’s autopsy.
Wagner says this “mystery photo” (taken from my slide show) shows the entrance point of a bullet low in the back of JFK’s skull, in occipital bone, the area specified in the autopsy report. The red arrow points to a semicircular notch, Wagner’s supposed entrance wound. But the “beveling” is on the outside of the skull, not the inside, where Dr. Finck said it was. This, therefore, is not the photo of the entrance wound that Finck meant.
The HSCA’s Charles Petty, MD, asked Finck: “If I understand you correctly, Dr. Finck, you wanted particularly to have a photograph made of the external aspect of the skull from the back to show that there was no cratering to the outside of the skull … Did you ever see such a photograph?” (my emphasis)
Finck: “I don’t think so and I brought with me memorandum referring to the examination of photographs in 1967… and as I can recall I never saw pictures of the outer aspect of the wound of entry in the back of the head and inner aspect in the skull in order to show a crater … I don’t remember seeing those photographs.”[26] Finck examined this photograph, which does show cratering on the outside, and he denied it was the occipital entrance photo. So how can Wagner, not a forensic pathologist, not a physician, and who wasn’t present, say that Finck, a forensic pathologist, who was there, who held JFK’s head in his hands, is wrong, and that he is right.
WAGNER AND KENNEDY’S PHYSICAL AND X-RAY EVIDENCE
Perhaps Wagner’s most desperate assaults on Lord Occam have to do with the physical evidence: Kennedy’s response to the shot that killed him, and the autopsy X-rays. By his lights, what we see happen to JFK’s head, what we see in the Zapruder film, and what’s visible in JFK’s X-rays, mesh smoothly with Hoover’s scenario. They don’t.
Put simply, we know from government duplication experiments done for the Warren Commission that, when human skulls are struck with Mannlicher ammo, they move differently than JFK’s did; the skull injuries are vastly different; and the X-ray findings are worlds apart. I ran through them in detail in my original review.
Briefly:
High-speed photos show that when struck with MCC rounds in the government’s tests, 10 out of 10 skulls moved away from the shooter, not back toward the shooter as Wagner argues Kennedy’s did. The photos also show that, like all “closed vessels,” the first reaction to bullet penetration is an explosion back out through the point of entrance.[27] Milliseconds later, there’s a burst through the outshoot on the opposite side of the skull, or “closed vessel.” (JFK’s skull showed no such rearward ejecta in the Z film.) Shot in accordance with the official theory, the test skull’s right forehead, entire right orbit, and right cheek were blown away. JFK suffered no such injuries.
There’s no small irony that the official experiments intended to “duplicate” what happened when Oswald shot JFK not only failed, they pretty much proved Oswald didn’t do it. (Fig. 7) The pictures below illustrate what I said about ejecta and facial damage.
JFK’s X-rays can’t keep Wagner’s ship afloat. A test skull shot with a Carcano round showed no “dust-like,” no “snowstorm,” of minuscule fragments. Wagner’s own expert, Larry Sturdivan, testified in detail why: jacketed bullets like Oswald’s don’t leave a “snowstorm” of minuscule fragments after blasting through bone.[28]
But in fact, there is a “snowstorm” of minuscule bullet fragments in the right front quadrant of JFK’s skull X-ray. They are clearly visible in JFK’s original, unenhanced X-rays, and their existence in that location was attested to by expert radiologists.[29] But they’re blotted out and are not visible in the poor quality, “enhanced” films available to the public.
Moreover, jacketed shells like Oswald’s don’t deviate much from their original flight path. Why? Because, as Larry Sturdivan testified, the jacketed “Mannlicher-Carcano bullet is much more stable, the yaw begins to grow much more slowly (than non-jacketed, military rounds do) … .”[30] (my emphasis)
Wagner asks us to believe that Oswald shot downward toward JFK’s receding skull, striking it low with a jacketed slug. It was then somehow deflected way upward to the top of JFK’s skull, leaving fragments high in the skull. (Figs.7&8)
Figure 8. Left: Sturdivan reproduced an X-ray of a test skull shot with a Mannlicher round at the Biophysics Lab.[31] The fragments are small, but not “dust-like.” Not like the “snowstorm” of fragments visible in the right-front quadrant of Kennedy’s still-secret, original and unenhanced, lateral X-ray. (Which is evidence JFK was killed with a non-jacketed bullet. For “dust-like” fragments are quickly stopped by brain tissue, and so lodge close to the point of entry.) Moreover, the test skull’s fragment trail closely follows a low, little-deviated flight path across the skull, precisely as Larry Sturdivan said happens with MCC rounds.
* Right: JFK’s “enhanced” lateral X-ray: small fragments are visible only along the top of the skull. Wagner says that, unlike the test skull, Oswald’s bullet was fired downward, struck JFK’s skull low, then popped up to the top of his skull, broke apart, and blew out of the right side of his head.
MOMENTUM – WHAT DROVE KENNEDY “BACK AND TO THE LEFT”?
Wagner offers no explanation for JFK’s rearward lunge. Except a “grassy knoll” shot did not do it. Why? Because JFK’s body is visibly “lifted against gravity” after Z-313. It’s something that Kennedy’s rearward head movement could not have accomplished. (He carefully avoids admitting it, but if not “momentum transfer” from a “grassy knoll” shot, his sole remaining pro-Hoover explanation for the rearward lunge is a “neuromuscular” reaction, one that lacks medical/scientific foundation, and that has been debunked.[32])
The proof Wagner is wrong is in the Zapruder film. The motion of JFK’s head appears to have been enough to pull his back along with it. For as JFK’s head moves, so does his upper body, and it does so in two different directions. Following Z-327, when an acoustics- and Z-film-corroborated shot hit him from behind, Kennedy’s head lunges frontward and his back moves forward with it. The opposite thing happens after Z-313: his head flies backward, and his back follows. So just as JFK’s back is “lifted against gravity” backward when his head jolts rearward after Z-313, his back is similarly “lifted against gravity” forward as the President’s head ploughs ahead after Z-327. (Fig. 9)
Figure 9. Kennedy’s “upper body” is “lifted against gravity” backward by the motion of his head after Z-313, just as it is similarly “lifted against gravity” forward after Z-327. (Image taken from a PowerPoint slide.)
THE “DEBRIS FIELD”
Josiah Thompson, Dr. Doug Desalles and I have repeatedly pointed out that the “debris field” – the region toward which most of Kennedy’s skull and brain matter flew – was “back and to the left” of Kennedy, consistent with a shot from the grassy knoll. Wagner counters that some “human matter” was also located forward of JFK. He’s right on that.
The explosion of JFK’s head at Z-313 would likely have sent some debris forward. As previously shown (Fig.7), some debris flies back toward the shooter when any closed vessel is struck. But most of the debris from the Z-312-313 shot clearly flew back to the left. Some of the forward-driven material likely flew due to a bullet strike to JFK’s head from the rear at Z-327-8. That strike drove JFK’s head and upper body rapidly forward after Z-327. It also abruptly changed the anterior-top portion of his skull, driving the “debris” that is seen falling down across his face a half-second later. High-quality Z-frames make this clear. (Fig. 10)
As final, corroborative points, an acoustics waveform suggested a shot was fired from behind at Z-327-8. And Z-frames 331 and 332 are “jiggled,” which fulfills the Alvarez-proposed, 3-frame delay for the sound of an Oswald shot at Z-327-8 to reach Zapruder and jostle his camera.[33]
Figure 10. Between Z-frame 327 and 337, Kennedy’s head is driven swiftly forward and downward; his back follows. The anterior portion of his head changes dramatically, and debris can be seen spilling down across his face. (If he was struck from behind at Z-327, why is there no rearward gush of ejecta seen as occurred in the government’s skull shooting tests, Fig. 7? Simply, by Z-327 the President’s skull was no longer a “closed vessel.”)
THE MAGIC BULLET – COMMISSION EXHIBIT #399
Wagner tries to salvage the dubious bona fides of the so-called “magic bullet” by eliding key facts. First, the FBI lied in Commission Exhibit #2011 when it reported that Parkland employees Tomlinson and Wright claimed #399 resembled the bullet they found on 11.22.63.[34] They never said that. The early, and only, report from the Bureau’s Dallas field office in 1964 reported that neither Tomlinson nor Wright could identify #399. Period. And, as Wagner admits, in 1966 O.P. Wright handed Thompson a bullet from his own desk that he said looked like the bullet they’d found. It had a pointed tip, not at all like the round-tipped #399. (As a former Dallas Sheriff, he would have known the difference.)
The FBI also lied, claiming that it was agent Bardwell Odum who had gotten the Tomlinson-Wright admission that there was a bullet resemblance. In person, in his own living room, Odum emphatically denied to Thompson and me that he’d gotten any such admission. He never talked with Tomlinson and Wright, or had #399 in his possession. The Bureau’s own internal records back up Odum’s unequivocal denials to us. Odum’s name is nowhere to be found in any FBI files regarding #399, according to searches done by skeptics as well as by the government.
It should not be ignored that #399 is “magical” in other ways as well. It’s supposed to have passed through JFK’s jacket and shirt on the way in, through his neck, his shirt again on the way out. It then nicked his tie, tore through Governor Connally’s jacket and shirt, blew completely through his chest, breaking a rib, and out through his shirt. Then it passed, butt-first, backward through the governor’s wrist, transected his trousers, before finally lodging in his leg, only later to fall out. And yet there are no fabric striations on the unblemished nose of #399. Nor is there any residuum of blood or tissue on this negligibly deformed missile. And it’s skeptics who are fools for not buying this?
ACOUSTICS
As I pointed out in my review, Wagner says that one should trust authorities “who are truly expert in the field in which they offer opinions.” He didn’t do that with the acoustics, nor with much else for that matter. The U.S. Justice Department didn’t either. Wagner omits any mention of a well-known, acoustics-related scandal.
When the HSCA went out of business, two of the committee members appropriately recommended that the pro-conspiracy acoustic evidence needed to be reexamined. They specified that acoustics experts should do the restudy.[35] As I discussed in my review, in typical fashion, the Justice Department ignored the HSCA’s directive. Justice first turned to a Bureau agent, B. E. Koenig, whose credentials consisted of his completing a quickie “Gee Whiz!” course in acoustics. His paper “refuting” the HSCA’s acoustics was promptly debunked and discredited.[36]
DOJ then turned to Nobel Prize winner, Luis Alvarez. He’d previously put out a false scientific finding that pleased the Carter Administration. His work on the so-called Vela incident proved nothing except that he could be relied upon to uphold a necessary government myth. [37][38]
U.S. officials needed a fixer for the acoustics. But Alvarez didn’t chair the reexamination. Instead, he arranged the panel. The selectees were all physicists known to Alvarez. None had any acoustics training or expertise. Not even the chair, Harvard’s Norman Ramsey, with whom Alvarez had long collaborated on prior government projects. He also picked Richard Garwin and F. Williams Sarles, both trusted alumni of Alvarez’s Vela fiasco. It was like picking pediatricians to do a hip replacement, except that the pediatricians I have personally known would never do what Alvarez and his appointees did.
Alvarez sat in and worked closely with his “Ramsey Panel,” and, lo and behold, they disproved the HSCA’s acoustics! Wagner shows no concern about this arrangement: progovernment, anticonspiracist Alvarez hand-picked non-experts who issued a progovernment opinion in a field in which they had no experience or expertise, and which supposedly disproved the findings of government-appointed scientists with proven experience and expertise. And it’s skeptics who are fools for not buying this?
Conclusion
A reasonable corollary of Lord Occam’s principle might be to reject a complex theory that requires suspending disbelief and embracing complex improbabilities if there is a simpler, less complex, less improbable theory that requires less suspension of disbelief. The evidence is so against Wagner that he asks us to suspend disbelief and accept complex improbabilities.
- That numerous percipient trauma surgeons, neurosurgery professors, FBI agent eye witnesses were wrong that Kennedy had a rearward skull wound;
- That nonphysician Wagner is right that the “mystery photo” in Fig. 6 is Kennedy’s occipital entrance wound from Oswald’s fatal bullet, and that JFK’s examining forensic pathologist Finck, who said it isn’t, is wrong;
- That JFK’s head flew backward toward Oswald’s rifle when all 10 test skulls that were similarly fired upon in government tests flew away from the shooter;
- That Oswald’s bullet entered Kennedy’s skull low on a downward trajectory, yet was wildly deflected upward. Which is in defiance of the expressed claims of Wagner’s experienced, government ballistics expert, Larry Sturdivan, whose opinion was confirmed in a government duplication test that showed that a Mannlicher shell was not deflected as it passed through a human skull;
- That Oswald’s jacketed MCC bullet left a “snowstorm” of minuscule fragments in the right front quadrant of JFK’s head when “snowstorms” in X-rays are not seen with jacketed bullets, but only with non-jacketed rounds. [Nor was a “snowstorm” seen in the X-ray of a test skull shot with an MCC shell in a government test. (Fig.8)]
- That the “debris field” that flew back to the left of JFK, and the skull fragments that flew leftward, were all driven backward and leftward by Oswald’s bullet that supposedly entered the right rear of Kennedy’s skull and blew out of the right front part of his head;
- That there is nothing noteworthy about the fact that none of the first four people in the chain of possession of the Parkland stretcher bullet were later able to identify #399 as that same bullet. Nor is it noteworthy that the FBI lied about #399 in official records. Nor that there was neither the marking of the shell’s having passed through fabric nor any tissue residues on the near-pristine bullet that is supposed to have been so destructive of fabric, flesh and bone;
- That a group of untrained, acoustics-ignorant physicists, appointed by an acoustics-ignorant, proven government toady and anticonspiracist (Luis Alvarez), definitively debunked the findings of three of the most highly regarded acoustics authorities in the country.
- That the debunked “neuromuscular reaction” and/or “jet effect” explain(s) Kennedy’s rearward lunge, and that the momentum imparted to JFK’s skull from a grassy knoll shot does not.
For Wagner, it’s always, well, under normal circumstances, a, b, c, … x, y, and z do not happen. But this time it’s different. As improbable as it may seem, folks, in this unique case, all these unlikely things did happen, and they happened just the way the government said they did … . And it’s the skeptics who are fools for not buying this? Well, we don’t buy it. Because we have long had a far less complicated theory than J. Edgar Hoover about what happened in Dealey Plaza. And it’s one that fits the evidence and is not in defiance of it. It explains things like JFK’s rearward lunge, which an Oswald shot does not; it explains things like ejecta backward; why the motorcycle cops were hit with blood and tissue while riding to JFK’s right; why there is a snowstorm of dust-like bullet fragments in the right front of Kennedy’s forehead. I could go on and on with this, but I think the reader gets the point by now.
If the government had been telling us the truth all along, there’d have been no need for intimidating witnesses, for destroying evidence, and for continuing to withhold evidence to this day.
So why does Wagner remain faithful to those who have endlessly lied and acted in such extraordinarily bad faith? How many more proven official malefactions would it take to shake his faith? I keep thinking of something Jeff Morley pointed out that’s worth repeating:
“In civil law, when one party does not disclose evidence in its possession, a jury is allowed to draw an adverse inference that the missing information destroyed or not produced was unfavorable.” Now, 60+ years after Kennedy was assassinated, it’s more than fair to draw the adverse inference that the missing information destroyed or not produced by the FBI, the CIA,[39] and the Secret Service was unfavorable to the government’s claim Oswald acted alone.[40]
One might have hoped that the government’s proven dishonesty and bad faith in the Kennedy case, which Jim Dieugenio, Jeff Morley, and others have shown have no limit and no end, would force a reckoning among Warren loyalists. There’s little doubt but that it has, among some. But from what he’s written in his books and in his riposte, it seems that there’s nothing that’s likely to ever shake Bob Wagner’s “patriotic” faith. And it’s skeptics who are fools for not buying this?
Click here to read the article by Robert Wagner that Gary Aguilar is responding to.
Editor’s note: Robert Wagner and Gary Aguilar have both been given space on this site to present their latest retorts on this ongoing debate. At this point, we have no plans to publish further discussion between the two researchers regarding this debate.
————
-
Curt Gentry. J. Edgar Hoover – the Man and the Secrets. New York. W.W. Norton & Co., 1991, p. 553, and p. 558. (Hoover kept a file on LBJ.)
-
See Hoover memo from 11.22.63 saying Oswald was the culprit: https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=62251#relPageId=97
-
JFK assassination files: Hoover said FBI must “convince the public” Oswald acted alone. CBS News. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/jfk-assassination-files-hoover-said-fbi-must-convince-the-public-oswald-acted-alone/
-
Curt Gentry. J. Edgar Hoover – the Man and the Secrets. New York. W.W. Norton & Co., 1991, p. 548 and p. 553.
-
See: Aguilar G. Warren Commission Counsels Burt Griffin and Howard Willens Attempt the Impossible: Shoring up the Tottering Credibility of Earl Warren’s Investigation. https://www.kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/warren-commission-counsels-burt-griffin-and-howard-willens-attempt-the-impossible-shoring-up-the-tottering-credibility-of-earl-warren-s-investigation
-
Sources at: Aguilar G. Warren Commission Counsels Burt Griffin and Howard Willens Attempt the Impossible: Shoring up the Tottering Credibility of Earl Warren’s Investigation https://www.kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/warren-commission-counsels-burt-griffin-and-howard-willens-attempt-the-impossible-shoring-up-the-tottering-credibility-of-earl-warren-s-investigation
-
Gerald D. McKnight. Breach of Trust – How the Warren Commission Failed the Nation and Why. Lawrence, Kansas: Kansas University Press, 2005, p. 150.
-
Warren Commission testimony of Robert McClelland, Hearings Vol. 6, p. 33. Hereafter 6H33.
-
Wagner, R. JFK Assassisnated – In the Courtroom Debating the Critical Research Community. Mill City Press, 2023, p. 210.
-
Warren Commission Exhibit #387, Autopsy Report and Supplemental Report, p. 3. https://aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wr/pdf/WR_A9_AutopsyReport.pdf
-
Warren Commission Exhibit #387, Autopsy Report and Supplemental Report, p. 3. https://aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wr/pdf/WR_A9_AutopsyReport.pdf
-
House Select Committee (HSCA) testimony of J. Thornton Boswell, MD. V7:253 https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol7/html/HSCA_Vol7_0132a.htm
-
HSCA memo of conversation with J. T. Boswell, HSCA record # 180-10093-10430-, agency file number 002071, p. 6. Also reproduced in ARRB Medical Document #26, see p. 6. See also my discussion of this 33 years ago:
Aguilar G, Cunningham K. HOW FIVE INVESTIGATIONS INTO JFK’S MEDICAL/AUTOPSY EVIDENCE GOT IT WRONG – DISCUSSION. https://history-matters.com/essays/jfkmed/How5Investigations/How5InvestigationsGotItWrong_6.htm
-
Image available at: Mantik D. The Omissions and Miscalculations of Nicholas Nalli
https://www.kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/the-omissions-and-miscalculations-of-nicholas-nalli
-
ARRB Master Set of Medical Exhibits, MD 29. https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/arrb/master_med_set/md209/html/md209_0001a.htm
-
https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/html/WH_Vol16_0501a.htm
-
HSCA V. 7:246. https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol7/html/HSCA_Vol7_0128b.htm
-
https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/arrb/medical_testimony/Boswell_2-26-96/html/Boswell_0045b.htm
-
Aguilar G. The Converging Medical Case for Conspiracy in the Death of JFK. In: Fetzer J, ed. Murder in Dealey Plaza, Part III. Chicago: Catfeet Press, 2000, p. 187.
-
Seattle Times, May 27, 1995. Jackie’s Memories Of JFK’s Death — In 1963 Interview, She Talked Of Seeing Husband Shot. https://archive.seattletimes.com/archive/19950527/2123253/jackies-memories-of-jfks-death—-in-1963-interview-she-talked-of-seeing-husband-shot
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h7cimeXvqLA
-
https://aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/arrb/master_med_set/md188/html/md188_0001a.htm
-
See my 1994 compilation of witness statements: JOHN F. KENNEDY’S FATAL WOUNDS: THE WITNESSES AND THE INTERPRETATIONS FROM 1963 TO THE PRESENT http://assassinationweb.com/ag6.htm
-
ARRB testimony of J. Thornton Boswell, p. 160-161. https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/boswella.htm
-
MD 28 – Reports From Lt. Col Finck to Gen. Blumberg (1/25/65 and 2/1/65). See Summary page: https://aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/arrb/master_med_set/md28/html/Image19.htm
-
HSCA testimony of Pierre Finck, MD. https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/finckhsca.htm
-
Besides the photos from the government’s Biophysics Lab, a posted video of extremely high speed videos of eggs being shot with bullets that repeatedly show that the first egress of debris exits the point of entrance. See “Cory Santos” videos posted online in an “Education Forum” discussion of “jet effect.” https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/27768-video-destroying-the-jet-effect/
-
See: Aguilar G. Is Robert Wagner the New Paul Hoch? – Part 2, “Snowstorm.” https://www.kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/is-robert-wagner-the-new-paul-hoch-part-2
-
See: Aguilar G. The X-Ray Evidence: Enhanced vs Unenhanced. In: Is Robert Wagner the New Paul Hoch? – Part 2 https://www.kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/is-robert-wagner-the-new-paul-hoch-part-2
-
Sturdivan, L. Testimony HSCA Vol. 1:394. https://aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol1/pdf/HSCA_Vol1_0908_3_Sturdivan.pdf
-
Sturdivan, L S. The JFK Myths. St. Paul. MN. Paragon House, 2005, p. 173.
-
* See: Aguilar G, Wecht CH. Dr. Nalli and Neuromuscular Reaction. In: Nicholas Nalli and the JFK Case, Part 2. https://www.kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/nicholas-nalli-and-the-jfk-case-part-2
* See: Aguilar G, Wecht CH. AFTE Journal — Volume 47 Number 3 — Summer 2015, p. 134-135. Available here: https://www.kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-reviews/nova-s-cold-case-jfk-junk-science-pbs
* See: Aguilar G. Wecht CH. AFTE Journal — Volume 48 Number 2 — Spring 2016, p. 72. Available here: https://www.kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-reviews/nova-s-cold-case-jfk-junk-science-pbs
-
Alvarez J. A physicist examines the Kennedy assassination film. Am. J. Physics, V.4, # 9. Sept. 1976. https://aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol1/pdf/HSCA_Vol1_0908_4_Alvarez.pdf
-
See Commission Exhibit #2011: https://www.history-matters.com/essays/frameup/EvenMoreMagical/images/Slide2.GIF
-
* HSCA Final Report, p. 486. https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/report/pdf/HSCA_Report_4_Remarks.pdf
* DISSENTING VIEWS BT HON. ROBERT W. EDGAR TO THE FINAL REPORT, p. 499. https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/report/pdf/HSCA_Report_4_Remarks.pdf
-
* Koenig, BE. Acoustic Gunshot Analysis – The Kennedy Assassination and Beyond (Conclusion) https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/acoustic-gunshot-analysis-kennedy-assassination-and-beyond
* Thompson. J. Last Second in Dallas. Lawrence, Kansas: University Press of Kansas, 2023, p. 275-300.
* See also memo from HSCA Chief Counsel, Robert Blakey, to the FBI’s William Webster dated 4.2/1981 that included a technical refutation of FBI Agent Koenig’s acoustics analysis written by James Barger and the acoustics authorities at Bold, Beranak and Newman, Inc. Cambridge, Mass: http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/FBI Records/062-117290/062-117290 Volume 25/62-117290P25b.pdf
-
Thompson. J. Last Second in Dallas. Lawrence, Kansas: University Press of Kansas, 2023.
-
* https://scienceandglobalsecurity.org/archive/sgs25wright.pdf
* Thompson. J. Last Second in Dallas. Lawrence, Kansas: University Press of Kansas, 2023, p. 280-284.
*See also” “The Vela Incident Nuclear Test or Meteoroid? Documents Show Significant Disagreement with Presidential Panel Concerning Cause of September 22, 1979 Vela “Double-Flash” Detection.” National Security Archives, 5/5/2006. Available here: https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB190/index.htm
*A good summary of government evidence proving a nuclear blast in the Vela Incident is available in: Report on the 1979 Vela Incident. Available here. [“(Investigative journalist Seymour) Hersh reports interviewing several members of the Nuclear Intelligence Panel (NIP), which had conducted their own investigation of the event. Those interviewed included its leader Donald M. Kerr, Jr. and eminent nuclear weapons program veteran Harold M. Agnew. The NIP members concluded unanimously that it was a definite nuclear test. Another member—Louis H. Roddis, Jr.—concluded that ‘the South African-Israeli test had taken place on a barge, or on one of the islands in the South Indian Ocean archipelago.’” [Hersh 1991; pg. 280-281. Available here. He also cited internal CIA estimates made in 1979 and 1980 which concluded that it had been a nuclear test. “The U.S. Naval Research Laboratory conducted a comprehensive analysis, including the hydroacoustic data, and issued a 300-page report concluding that there had been a nuclear event near Prince Edward Island or Antarctica [Albright 1994b].”
-
CIA Hid Key Oswald Ties from JFK Investigators, New Docs Confirm
July 14, 2025 https://rockymountainvoice.com/2025/07/14/cia-hid-key-oswald-ties-from-jfk-investigators-new-docs-confirm/
